Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

homestead - Re: [Homestead] Alaskan Independence and Palin

homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Homestead mailing list

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: EarthNSky <erthnsky AT bellsouth.net>
  • To: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [Homestead] Alaskan Independence and Palin
  • Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 00:10:14 -0400

I had no idea. I did a quick search on Vogler and I think I get it now.
Vogler = Ayers
AIP = CDC/Woods Fund
Iranians supports Palin through AIP
Iranians supports Obama through Hamas :)

With my Libertarian leanings, I think I can get away with saying
"'that one' was yet another Libertarian kook'.
I wonder if they said that about Thomas Jefferson in his day.
Of course, then I found this:
"Old Joe" wanted Alaska lands homesteaded, federal regulations on land
development toileted, an end of rules of behavior from paternal
governments and a road from Fairbanks to Nome, opening western Alaska to
development and settlers."
Which made me kind of like the guy.
And then
this...(http://www.juneauempire.com/stories/031408/nei_257857638.shtml)

Surprisingly, a constitutional lawyer by education, Vogler maintained
Alaska statehood violated the U.N. Charter which the United States signed. That charter declared signatory's territories must be allowed
self-determination and a vote on independence. "Old Joe" claimed
both Alaska and Hawaii were denied this. FDR had the clause placed in
the charter knowing such a vote would have to be held in Alaska.

Constitutionally, Vogler was also correct that Alaska statehood is illegal since the United States did not give territorial Alaskans the
option of independence when statehood was voted on. (If one studies the Alaskan newspapers of the late 1950s, there was discussion of becoming a commonwealth similar to today's Puerto Rico rather than becoming a state. There was no discussion of independence.)

Every Supreme Court ruling since Chief Justice John Marshall declared
Georgia's seizure of Cherokee lands in the 1820sillegal has maintained that signed treaties like the U.N. Charter are paramount over acts and laws passed by Congress including the Alaska Statehood Bill. But, with the Cold War on, neither Truman nor Eisenhower were going to take a chance of losing Alaska's strategic position, maintained "Old Joe."

So the guy was Anti-American and vocal about it. I couldn't find any
actual violence(from any kind of terrorist act) other than his death,
but I only looked at maybe 5 pages.
I suppose the difference in the Vogler/Ayers comparison is that Vogler
is dead and the Palins joined up after his death. Vogler's cohorts
don't seem to share his staunch anti-American beliefs. Ayers is alive
and Obama worked directly with him. Those that surround Ayers seem to
share his Anti-Americanism.

To recap from the AIP site:
The Alaskan Independence Party's goal is the vote we were entitled to
in 1958, one choice from among the following four alternatives:

1) Remain a Territory.
2) Become a separate and Independent Nation.
3) Accept Commonwealth status.
4) Become a State.

So, what is wrong with that?
I have a question for y'all...is this any different than say, the Lakota Nation wanting a vote? Would we be so critical of a Native American candidate involved with such a group?

Is there anything else I am missing?

Bev





Marie McHarry wrote:

The party seems to have moved beyond the initial aspirations of its founder, Joe Vogler, who wrote that "the fires of hell are frozen glaciers compared to my hatred of the United States." Mr. Vogler apparently died in a deal for plastic explosives gone bad, which stopped his appearance before the UN (sponsored by the Iranian government) to speak for Alaska independence. None of it seems too awful unless you are friendly toward it *and* want to be the US VP. I
don't think they've blown anyone up recently.


--
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: 'I'm from
the government and I'm here to help.'" Ronald Reagan




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page