Help us get the beach open!

Post by **Apricot** » Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:43 am

Sucks.

That Carol Dillon is very well spoken, is she being heard by any responsible party?

Post by Ry » Thu Jun 04, 2009 10:24 am

Post by Ry » Wed Jun 10, 2009 11:28 pm

Ill be at the county meeting June 15 with my own cameraman.

Post by Ry » Sun Jun 14, 2009 9:03 am

Our Island and way of life have been stripped away from us by an activist judge and a special interest group that doesn’t live on the Island. Judge Boyle has no right to even entertain this case. Closing down beaches on an Island cannot have any result other than a disaster. This is the last thing we needed over lapping a nationwide recession.

The pretext to close the beach is insincere, unscientific, and most of all unconstitutional. In the past, the federal government fought tooth and nail to create recreational parks on America’s seashores to be enjoyed by the public. The original intent was to connect the historical sites of the Wright Brother Memorial and the Lighthouses together by a road, and to have Park Service do what its name implies, Service the Park. The role of the Park Service was to provide access to the historic sites and recreational area. They are supposed to be providing access not limiting it. The large argument at the time wasn’t framed as a debate between animals and people. The fight was between the government who wanted a public beach unspoiled for all to use, and private land owners who wanted to develop the beach for themselves. After the Florida land boom in the 1920s the government set up research planners to create recreational lands preserve for the public’s use but not open to development. Completely separate from that issue was setting aside some land to be designated as Wild Life Preserves for the animals. The Phipp’s family donated large plots of land to be used as a public beach and managed by the Park Service whose initial role was building ramps and preventing erosion. How much this roll has reversed today is sickening.

Cape Hatteras became one of ten current National Seashores. By definition they are recreational Parks. In fact, from 1940-1954 it was called the Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area. “Recreational Area” was dropped from the title in 1954 because it was redundant, for “National Seashore” had already been defined by the Park Service itself as a Recreational area. Congress had passed a bill allowing limited hunting to be added to the forms of recreation in the national seashore of Cape Hatteras, on the recommendation of a letter from the Secretary of Interior (Oscar Chapman).

Pea Island was set aside as a Wild Life Refuge, and Cape Hatteras and Ocracoke, aside from land set aside for the villages and some adjacent land to allow them to grow, was to become a Recreational Park (National Seashore). For over 4 generations people have been driving to Cape Hatteras and Ocracoke from as far away as Canada to enjoy the public beaches. Beach driving has been allowed the entire time without conflict. You can’t even reach portions of the beach outside the villages without a vehicle in the most popular places on Cape Hatteras.

You cannot retroactively change a National Seashore into a Wildlife Reserve anymore than you could suddenly change a Wildlife Reserve into a Recreational Beach. If good fishing or surfing were suddenly discovered on Pea Island, that would not mean some fishing interest group could go grab a questionable judge and start fishing on the Wildlife Reserve which had been there as such for nearly a century. Likewise, a bird enthusiast cannot change a recreational park on an Island where people already live and have their entire economy intrinsically tied to, and just say no more going to the beach because I want to make it a de-facto Wildlife Reserve.

There is no real science to back this attack on our Civil Liberties, only weak colorations of statistics which ignore numerous other variables, and cherry pick papers that aren’t even subject to peer review, thus making them worthless. This is a Civil Liberty issue. As Americans, as humans, we have a right to our own beach, our heritage, and a massive part of our cultural way of life as well as our economic lifeline.

Ask yourself if Central Park in New York would be closed to the public if suddenly some albino squirrel were to be discovered living there. Driving on the Beach is not hurting the Piping Plover. However not driving on the beach is hurting plenty of other animals. If anything, the presence of people on the beach has been preventing natural predators from entering the area to kill birds and eat eggs. Now that Americans have been removed from the land by the Police State, the area must be patrolled constantly by Park Service workers who have been gassing and shooting thousands of other animals. The fox, raccoons, geese, crabs, and other native animals have also lost their beach as well as their lives.

The whole Island knows that this issue has nothing to do with birds. It’s about economics. All across the nation, hiding behind “environmental” pretext the government is stealing public land in order to privatize them for profit. By privatize I don’t mean the free market; I mean state ownership, also known as communism. What the Park Service plans to do, based on their own meetings and what they have already done in other areas such as Cape Cod, is to come to a “compromise” between the Americans and the non-indigenous, un-endangered birds. The goal is to control not provide access to the beaches. They desire a policed beach in which people will have to pay for parking and purchase permits and passes in order access the once public and free recreational park. They want to turn a public beach for everyone into a personal profit for the NPS just like they did the historical site of the Cape Hatteras Lighthouse which now charges a fee to those who wish to climb it and then the money goes to a “general fund” of the government and not to the needs of the Island.

The Island’s problems with government intervention and the Park Service have been numerous, from burning down forest, to displacing sand to fill in swamps for navy bases, they have added to the problem of beach erosion not prevented it.

The Audubon Society does not live here. If they want to sacrifice property or park to the birds, they can start with their own houses and businesses. No one should point to an area where other people live and say, “I would like that for my personal play ground, a week out of the year, make it so.” We can’t let interest groups with money trample over the civil rights of others just because they have a personal hobby.

This is a commonsense issue. The history of the law is on our side. But what we have here is two wolves deciding the fate of a sheep. The NPS is not going to fight the Southern EnviroMental Law or the Audubon Society because they don’t care. They want an excuse to turn the public beach into their own money maker. We just want what was promised to us. The NSP is dragging its feet to try and fix something that wasn’t broken.

This is a picture of a brochure from the Park Service itself from 1935 advertising the recreational park. NOte the recreational activities pictured.

The new fad for stealing land today is no longer by force as that is no longer acceptable in the world community. What the government does now is site ‘environmental’ reasons for taking away land that it wants. This trend started early, as it was the first set of rationalizations used by the department of interior to steal more land away from American Indians who they could no longer just shoot. The BIA was moved from the war department to the department of Interior and several government agencies like the Forrest Reserve NPS etc were created. This is how the Taos and Apache were removed. They were then relocated by train to concentration camps in Florida. A young Austrian man read this and became quite inspired by the efficiency of it…

The environmental extremists have found a judge unethical enough to kill a recreational park enjoyed by millions of visitors and a stable of North Carolina’s economy, without ANY compensation. In fact the Islanders and its visitors had no say in the matter at all. The entire case hinges on an executive order issued by Nixon before I was even born. The Island and the Native species were just fine the past 40 years since this order about trails was issued under trick dicky. Last time I check executive orders are not laws and they do not overturn laws. Congress makes the laws. The order states for the NPS to develop a plan for ORVs in general (not beach driving) when beach driving already had a plan backed by four decades of law and precedent. We don't have any trails, it's a breach. The order was clearly aimed at nature trails in inland parks. The Park Service, true to its reputation, did nothing, and that is why we are in this mess today. Congress needs to overrule this or the Park Service need to submit this plan, which I have made for them. All beaches which have been open for the past 100 years will remain open because it is our duty as the Park Service to provide access to the recreational area and that mean all of it. It’s not a Wild Life Refuge, anymore than the city you live in is a Wild Life Refuge. It belongs to the public as a beach for recreational purposes and always has. End of discussion.

Post by Ry » Sun Jun 14, 2009 9:03 am

Federal Law and The Official Code Of Conduct For U.S. Judges explicitly prohibit judges from sitting on case where there is a conflict of interest. No conflict of interest is ever more clear than when it is financial. Judge Bolye has repeatedly ruled in favor of companies or parent companies which he held stock in during the time of the trial and verdicts.
The ‘Judge’

“On Sept. 17, 2004, He Ruled Against Deborah Virgil, Whose 11-Year-Old Son, Craig, Had Been Hit And Killed By An Amtrak Train In Elm City, N.C., In March 2003.” “Virgil Sued The Conductor, Amtrak And CSX Transportation, The Company That Owned And Operated The Tracks. Boyle Reported Stock Holdings In Parent Company CSX Corp. While He Presided Over The Case.”

“Starting In 2002, Terrence W. Boyle, A Longtime Federal District Court Judge In North Carolina, Presided Over A Lawsuit Against General Electric, In Which The Corporation Stood Accused Of Illegally Denying Disability Benefits To A Long-Standing Employee.”
“Deep Into The Case, On Jan. 15, 2004, Judge Boyle Bought Stock In General Electric, According To A Review Of His Financial Filings. Two Months Later, He Made His Ruling: Boyle Shot Down The Plaintiff's Claims … Granting Him Only A Fraction Of The Money In Short-Term Compensation

“In A Case In 2002 Against America Online And Other Companies, One Plaintiff Did Request That Judge Boyle Recuse Himself, But Boyle Refused. The Plaintiff Alleged He Was Biased Against Her – Though, Ironically, She Did Not Know At The Time Of Boyle's Reported Stock Holdings In AOL Time Warner, The Parent Company Of America Online.”

“Early In His Nomination Process In 2001 … [Boyle] Was In The Middle Of A Case Involving Quintiles Transnational, A Pharmaceutical Services Company In Which He Reported Stock Holdings, And On Whose Behalf He Had Been Issuing Favorable Rulings

“In Most Of The Cases, Boyle Ruled In Favor Of The Companies In Which He Had Financial Interests -- Though His Participation Was A Violation Of The Law Regardless Of How He Ruled.”(Will Evans, “Controversial Bush Judge Broke Ethics Law,” Salon.Com, 5/1/06)

“Federal Law And The Official Code Of Conduct For U.S. Judges Explicitly Prohibit Judges From Sitting On Such Cases – No Matter How Small Their Stock Holdings – In Order To Ensure Public Trust In The Judicial System.”
The Law
First it was concluded that cities were responsible for urban playgrounds and ball fields. Second while states had more sizable areas available, for “transient enjoyment and relaxation of out doors…
On June 14, 1926, Congress passed the Recreational and Public Purposes Act (44 Stat. 741) to stimulate state development of recreational areas by allowing the Secretary of the Interior to convey to the states by sale, lease or exchange certain public lands for park or recreational purposes.
In 1928, the American Forestry Association and the National Parks Association sponsored a report entitled “Recreation Resources of Federal Lands” calling for a new federal policy on recreation and
land planning. The report noted that development and commercial pressure were increasing
recreational use of public lands in the absence of federal planning for such use.

First, it concluded that cities were responsible for urban playgrounds and ball fields. Second, while states had more sizeable areas available for “transient enjoyment and relaxation out-of-doors,” the report claimed that “man cannot replace the wilderness and the remaining wilderness of America, modified as inevitably it has been, is now found only in Federal ownership.” Thus, the report continued, it was “the great responsibility of the Federal Government to provide those forms of outdoor life and recreation which it alone can give and which are associated with the wilderness.”

By an act of July 10, 1930 (46 Stat. 1021), Congress enunciated another important principle—
conserving the natural beauty of shore lines for recreational use.

Two other key park supporters were North Carolina Congressmen
Lindsay C. Warren (1889-1976) and his successor
Herbert C. Bonner (1891-1965).

Finally, Cape Hatteras is the first national park to recognize that the federal government has a responsibility to maintain public access to the nation’s beaches.

In 1936, Congress passed the Park, Parkway, and Recreation Study Act. ...The final report from this important nationwide survey was not published until late in 1941 by which time the onset of World War II delayed significant action on its recommendations.

The Florida land boom of the 1920s had demonstrated how quickly private development could overwhelm such landscapes and seriously reduce public access to shoreline areas, especially near major population centers. It was feared that the trend would continue once economic conditions improved. When the brief national survey was completed in 1935, it recommended twelve areas for national seashore status and thirty areas to be protected by states as state parks.27 One of these areas was the Outer Banks of North Carolina, which the survey envisioned as a park stretching from the Virginia line in the north to the tip of Ocracoke Island in the south.

In late November 1934, Roger W. Toll, superintendent of Yellowstone National Park, offered an
appraisal of the suitability of the Outer Banks for national park purposes to Director Cammerer. Toll
had participated in the national coastal area survey. Toll concluded that Cape Hatteras is “most suited to development as a national ocean beach.” He offered several reasons: First, “the area is primitive in character. There are no summer homes nor public resort developments in the area.” Second, the remoteness of the Outer Banks tended to keep land costs low. On the other hand, Toll noted that the area was reasonably close to large populations, had a good climate, and good beach recreational opportunities,such as fishing, boating, and swimming.

Toll’s memorandum to Cammerer suggests that the Park Service thought of the Outer Banks as the prototypical coastal park. His findings are also the first record of the Park Service’s initial evaluation of the Cape Hatteras area for park purposes. It is notable that from its earliest assessment, the Park Service described the essential elements that would ultimately characterize Cape Hatteras National Seashore. These elements included both accessible and remote beach areas suitable for public bathing and fishing, villages set apart from the park but linked by a paved road to remove the cumbersome problem of driving over sand, and a vague awareness that some accommodation with hunting
would be necessary.

On May 7, 1935, the General Assembly of North Carolina enacted a law (HB 795) authorizing the state to transfer donated or state-owned lands in Dare and Currituck Counties to the federal government for the purpose of creating a national park. (Copy of “An Act to authorize the transfer or gift from the state of North Carolina to the Federal Government of certain lands…,” attached to memorandum from H.E. Weatherwax, to Mr. Chatelain, September 15, 1936, “Correspondence 1936-1939” folder, Cape Hatteras National Seashore file, National Center for Cultural Resources (NCCR), National Park Service, Washington, D.C..)

On June 23, 1936, President Roosevelt signed an “act to authorize a study of the park, parkway, and
recreational-area programs in the United States, and for other purposes” (49 Stat. 1894)

Nevertheless, according to NPS historians Harlan D. Unrau and G. Frank Willis, the national recreation
study led the Park Service to establish four new types of parks in the Park System: Recreational
Demonstration Areas, national parkways, national recreation areas, and national seashores. Heavy NPS involvement in all of these areas where recreation was emphasized, as opposed to natural beauty
or history, signified its emergence as the lead federal authority on the subject.119 The Park, Parkway, and Recreational Area Study Act forced the Park Service to begin serious thought about how recreational areas should be developed and managed. Cape Hatteras, as the first national seashore, played a central role as a test case while the Park Service sorted out its new responsibilities. The act also played an important role in boosting the influence of Conrad Wirth, who was tasked to oversee these innovations and who remained involved in the Cape Hatteras project throughout what proved to be a remarkable NPS career.

Cape Hatteras National Seashore relates to the Park, Parkway, and Recreational Area Act somewhat as
Mesa Verde National Park relates to passage of the American Antiquities Act. The latter two were authorized by Congress in 1906 to staunch the looting of ancient Native American ruins. The supporters
of these archeological protection acts, and their arguments, were overlapping. Similarly, supporters
of the park, parkway, and recreation study, which included much focus upon the protection and use of coastal areas for recreational purposes, saw Cape Hatteras as the foremost example of a possible seashore recreational park.

(H.R. 7022)...wildlife refuge being established on Pea Island by the Biological Survey was to be included within the national seashore under the administration of the Park Service. However, the Park Service was only responsible for managing compatible recreational use. Jurisdiction for protecting migratory water fowl was to remain under the authority of the Secretary of Agriculture, who at the time had oversight of the Biological Survey

***p47
In his letter to the House committee, Chapman also made several important points regarding the
purpose of the seashore, which by explicit and favorable reference of both the House and Senate
Committees on Public Lands, represent the intent of Congress: The area would be preserved as a primitive wilderness, except for swimming, boating, sailing, fishing, and other recreational activities of a similar nature. . . . One of the outstanding types of landscape which is not adequately represented in the National Park System is that of the seashore. It is a recognized fact that the seashore has
a strange appeal to a wide range of the population. . . . The scenic theme of Cape Hatteras is that of the sand beach, which is of excellent quality for a distance of 150 miles. The fact that these barrier islands are almost inaccessible from the mainland has preserved them from private and commercial recreational development. Also of scenic interest is Diamond Shoals, which extends out into the ocean about 6 miles from the extreme easterly point of Cape Hatteras. Here the current from the south meets the current
from the north, resulting in a wild, spectacular battle of surf, in contrast to the quiet, protected waters of Pamlico Sound across the narrow barrier. The area is rich in bird life. It is one of three principal migration lanes of the United States for ducks, geese, and other migratory waterfowl. . . . There are definite historical values attached to Cape Hatteras [graveyards, lighthouses, Fort Raleigh]. . . . The area is particularly adapted to concentrated use for water sports, so necessary for the densely populated sections of the central eastern seaboard [swimming, fishing, boating].

On August 2, 1937, the House Committee on Public Lands recommended passage of the bill to the
whole House, which voted on it the same day.130 Immediately following this vote, Warren telegrammed his friend Sheriff Victor Meekins in Manteo: “House passed unanimously Cape Hatteras park bill.”13

On June 29, 1940, Congress amended the 1937 authorizing legislation for Cape Hatteras National
Seashore to permit hunting. The amendment to allow hunting specifically referred to compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. This provision would later be key in determining how the Park Service actually interpreted “hunting” within the seashore, but perhaps for the first time in the history
of the Park Service, legal hunting was now authorized within a national park. The same amendment
also changed the formal title of the park to “Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area.”

The term “recreational area” was derived clearly from the Secretary’s justification to allow hunting and by the Service’s desire to limit the setting of any precedent for more traditional types of parks. However, the Park Service had already defined a “national seashore” as a recreational area in its 1937 brochure explaining the Park, Parkway, and Recreational Study Act and the anticipated recreational
purposes of the park were established by Congress through Acting Secretary Chapman’s letter to the
House Committee on Public Lands cited above. Thus, including the term “recreational area” in the title was redundant. In 1954 the Park Service authorized the original park name to be used for all administrative purposes except for formal memoranda and documents requiring the full legal name.153 Subsequently, the term “recreational area” fell from use in most official references to the park.

So from 1940-1954 it was called the Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area.

Regional Director Russell noted that he had alreadytaken action to begin the drafting of a comprehensive plan and to formulate a new work program more in keeping with the future of the area.200 It certainly was not too soon. The Park Service had been thinking about the area for at least three years. The plan Russell had begun drew, at least indirectly, upon the preliminary report for the proposed Hatteras seashore recreational area commissioned by Conrad Wirth in 1934.201 However, it drew much more heavily upon the “Planning Prospectus” published in March 1938. As mentioned previously, when Congress passed the Park, Parkway, and Recreational Area Study Act and the Cape Hatteras National Seashore authorizing legislation, it gave the National Park Service an opportunity to develop a standard policy for the adoption and development not only of Cape Hatteras as a national seashore, but of all such areas.202 The 1938 prospectus, therefore, was understood to be a model for the development of future similar areas and enunciated a broadprogram:
Primarily a seashore is a recreational area. Therefore in its selection, the boundaries should
be placed in such a manner that the maximum variety of recreation is provided. Thus, while the
provision of bathing may be the first consideration of these areas, it must be kept in
mind that a far greater number of people will be more interested in using a seashore areas for
other recreational purposes. It is desirable therefore to provide ample shoreline for all types
of beach recreation. Adjacent lands should be of sufficient interest for their historical, geological, forestry, wildlife, or other interests to justify federal preservation. Sufficient additional land and/or water areas should be included to protect the areas intended for preservation. The development and operation of the Seashore areas shall follow the normal national park standards with the understanding that
recreational pursuits shall be emphasized to provide activities in as broad a field as is
consistent with the preservation of the area. It shall be the policy of the Service to permit fishing, boating and other types of recreation under proper regulations and in designated areas where such activities may not conflict with other factors of greater importance.203 (meaning archeological work)

President Eisenhower appointed Douglas McKay Secretary of the Interior on January 21, but according to the Coastland Times, those “mercenary land grabbers” hoping that Secretary McKay would tear up the plans for the seashore were disappointed. In early March, McKay spoke about Cape Hatteras National Seashore before the North American Wildlife Conference:
I am sure that all of you have been as pleased as I am that the joint efforts of the State, the National Park Service and two private foundations are making possible the permanent dedication of this beautiful strip of unspoiled coastline to the enjoyment of all citizens. I understand that it took 15 years to complete the arrangements, but it is worth it. Since the seashore is a limited resource of great importance to the people of the United States for wholesome recreation, all levels of government should cooperate in acquiring enough of it to meet the public needs.496

On January 12, 1953, Wirth recommended that Secretary Chapman approve an order, consistent with
Section 4 of the Act of August 17, 1937, directing that certain lands on the Outer Banks of North
Carolina be “administered, protected, and developed by the National Park Service for national seashore recreational purposes for the benefit and enjoyment of the people.” This order marked the formal establishment of Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area, although the date was not immediately observed, however, because the land acquisition process was not complete.

Post by Ry » Thu Jun 18, 2009 8:35 am

Furthermore it has cost the tax payers of the US have shelled out hundreds of thousands of dollars to pay the NPS to murder animals for being animals. What do they plan to do, go on shooting opossum and raccoons indefinitely until none are left? It is not like they can swim to the Island. Historically the word Raccoon (to scratch) was derived from American Indians on Hatteras Island and incorporated into English. And now they are being killed off because to environmental groups an animal only has value if it is rare or can fly.

The whole Island knows that this issue has nothing to do with birds. It’s about economics. All across the nation, hiding behind “environmental” pretext the government is stealing public land in order to privatize them for profit. By 'privatize' I don’t mean the free market; I mean state ownership, also known as communism. What the Park Service plans to do, based on their own meetings and what they have already done in other areas such as Cape Cod, is to come to a “compromise” between the Americans and the non-indigenous, un-endangered birds. The goal is to control not provide access to the beaches. They desire a policed beach in which people will have to pay for parking and purchase permits and passes in order access the once public and free recreational park. They want to turn a public beach for everyone into a personal profit for the NPS just like they did the historical site of the Cape Hatteras Lighthouse which now charges a fee to those who wish to climb it and then the money goes to a “general fund” of the government and not to the needs of the Island.

The Island’s problems with government intervention and the Park Service have been numerous, from burning down forest, to displacing sand to fill in swamps for navy bases, the government has added to the problem of beach erosion not prevented it.

The Audubon Society does not live here. If they want to sacrifice property or park to the birds, they can start with their own houses and businesses. No one should point to an area where other people live and say, “I would like that for my personal play ground, a week out of the year, make it so.” We cannot let interest groups with money trample over the civil rights of others just because they have a personal hobby.

This is a commonsense issue. The history of the law is on our side. But what we have here is two wolves deciding the fate of a sheep. The NPS is not going to fight the Southern Environmental Law or the Audubon Society because they don’t care. They want an excuse to turn the public beach into their own money maker. We just want what was promised to us. The NPS is dragging its feet to try and fix something that wasn't broken.

The new fad for stealing land today is no longer by force as that is no longer acceptable in the world community. What the government does now is site ‘environmental’ reasons for taking away land that it wants. This trend started early, as it was the first set of rationalizations used by the department of interior to steal more land away from American Indians who they could no longer just shoot. The BIA was moved from the war department to the department of Interior and several government agencies like the Forest Reserve NPS etc were created. This is how the Taos and Apache were removed. They were then relocated by train to concentration camps in Florida. A young Austrian man read this and became quite inspired by the efficiency of it…

The environmental extremists have found a judge unethical enough to kill a recreational park enjoyed by millions of visitors and a stable of North Carolina’s economy, without ANY compensation. In fact, the Islanders and its visitors had no say in the matter at all. The entire case hinges on an executive order issued by Nixon before I was even born. Last time I check executive orders are not laws and they do not overturn laws. Congress makes the laws. The order states for the NPS to develop a plan for a beach that already had a plan backed by four decades of law and precedent. The Park Service true to its reputation did nothing, and that is why we are in this mess today. Congress needs to overrule this or the Park Service need to submit this plan, which I have made for them. All beaches which have been open for the past 100 years will remain open because it is our duty as the Park Service to provide access to the recreational area and that means all of it. It’s not a Wild Life Refuge, anymore than the city you live in is a Wild Life Refuge. It belongs to the public as a beach for recreational purposes and always has. End of discussion.

Federal Law and The Official Code of Conduct for U.S. Judges explicitly prohibit judges from sitting on cases where there is a conflict of interest. No conflict of interest is ever clearer than when it is financial. Judge Bolye has repeatedly ruled in favor of companies or parent companies which he held stock in during the time of the trial and verdicts. This never should have had a trial. We need the support of our visitors and any American in favor of Civil Liberties and holding the government to its promises to give us support. Pressure congress into overturning this activist federal judge's bogus decision. Because it has ruined the Island.

Ocracoke, Hatteras, and Nagshead have been hit the hardest by this insane and highly irresponsible decision by a questionable federal judge. There is a reason laws come from congress. Congress represents the people and the people’s interests. And yet the will of the people for this area of North Carolina has been completely ignored because a judge has circumvented the law making process by clinging to an obscure interpretation of one executive order by a president who was impeached. Impeachment… now that’s a nice sounding word.

http://www.takingliberty.us/ see here for the next speaker to come to Hatteras Saturday June 20th at the Anglers club at 7pm

Post by **Phys** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 10:29 am

Nice job.

Post by **Apricot** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 10:55 am

That was EXCELLENT Ry, woot, woot!

Post by **Raider** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 1:07 pm

Awesome job Ry!

Tell them to show you the law, not tell you the law, on paper in print. If they say it's an Act, that's not a law. Acts are Statues that have the force of law only, and I mean ONLY, if you the individual gives your CONSENT to follow that Act=Statue.

Post by Ry » Fri Jun 19, 2009 10:40 am

Thank you to:

James Harris, Member of the Neg Reg Committee who brought the resolution, and Cynthia Harris from Kitty Hawk; Mattie Lawson of Kill Devil Hills, Dare GOP Secretary; Perry White, Dare GOP Vice Chair, and George Embrey of Nags Head; and Kevin Conner, Dare GOP Chairman, of Hatteras. James and Cynthia got the required 1000 copies of the Resolution, Mattie, Cynthia, Perry and Mattie made sure delegates got a copy. Everyone worked the floor for support.

I (Ryan Dawson) thank you all, and to be clear, this is not a political party issue. It was a Republican Judge and Democratic congress who have shot us down so far. It has nothing to do with parties but I am glad that the GOP is finally listening to us and appears to be on the right side. (for this issue)

Also THANK you to everyone who could attend the Commissioners meeting on June 15th. I think even though it's a lot of preaching to the choir the most important thing is that we filmed the whole thing. I had my own camera man and a CNN reporter was there who is now working with me to rip Judge Boyle down to size and reverse his decision.

Ill have copies of the meeting up on youtube later as they get processes from quicktime to flash. The Anglers Club has a meeting Saturday June 20 and 7pm I hope you will all be there.

I'm asking them if I can speak again so that I can finish the rest of my speech that I was not permitted to say given the time restrictions of the commissioners meeting.

The case is pretty simple, as I explained in my speech. So all we are really lacking right now is the proper media attention. Part of this is because the Park Service has not allowed us to film at meeting where the public was allowed to speak and now they won't even hold meeting on the Island. Here is the solution. We hold our own meetings and we film it ourselves. I had the entire meeting (which was not aired on TV today for whatever reason) filmed by my own friend (who is a documentary make from New York).

If we gather enough footage of the outrage from the public we can take it directly to the press and our congress. Face it most of congress doesn't even read the bills they sign. They just vote down party lines. And in their minds they wrongly assume this is an issue about the environment. We have to make a FILM for them to watch, or for our rep to present on the house floor so that they can be made aware of what is REALLY going on.

They've never seen it. They gotten phone calls but they haven't seen the rooms pack with people full of horror stories. Once this thing goes to the MSM and congress its not over. We need to go on the offense and sue the judge and all the affiliated groups who brought this on.

I don't think we really have to poke around at what all harm has been done or not done to certain birds. It's irrelevant because its not a wild life preserve anyway. This was all explicitly explained when the park was created and that the adjacent lands (like Pea island) were deemed sufficient for the birds etc. It's congressional law and it can't be overturned by one judges interpretation of one executive order from tricky dicky. That's completely unconstitutional. Judge aren't supposed to make laws. They only supposed to determine if you have broken one or not. And executive orders to not trump congressional laws. That's common sense that an 8th grader can tell you.

-Ryan

Help us get the beach open!

Re: Help us get the beach open!

Re: Help us get the beach open!

Re: Help us get the beach open!

Re: Help us get the beach open!

Re: Help us get the beach open!

Re: Help us get the beach open!

Re: Help us get the beach open!

Re: Help us get the beach open!

Re: Help us get the beach open!

Re: Help us get the beach open!