Sports Forum   |   Scoreboard   |   Contact Us   |   WinPicks Software   |   Talkstock   |   Advertise   |   Follow Us on Twitter   |   Register  |   Login 
Register to post in the sports forumDownload the ScoresLine App for Android 

 
 
Forums   Register   Profile   Inbox   Address Book   Subscribe   My Forums   Search   FAQ   Login   Log Out

The UN   Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Other Sports] >> The Sports Bar >> The UN Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
The UN - 11/27/2000 12:00:00 AM   
scalpelman

 

Posts: 423
Joined: 10/6/1998
From: Sequin
Status: offline
This past several months has really opened my eyes. During this time, I read and digested an enormous amount of material. Thus, I conclude:

The mainstream media is completely controlled. You can get the same basic 40 channels just about everywhere. It is far more than a simple bias. Watch less TV.

There is little difference between Republicans and Democrats. It really boils down to socialism verses capitalism and our constitution. You are one or the other. You cannot be both.

If we are not careful, we might wake up under UN control in 10-20 years. I am serious. Read the UN Charter.


If you care about our sovereignty, now is the time to start reading about the UN.

Free Republic
Etherzone
American Policy Center
Freedom.org
Anxiety Center

Good Luck.


The Aftermath of the U.N. Millennium Summit...
A Renewed Commitment to Global Governance
More Articles

By Peyton Knight, Associate Editor

Now that the U.N. Millennium Summit has come and gone, many are wondering "what happened?" What consensus was reached at the gathering? Are the tools for global governance in place? What will become of our nation’s sovereignty? Did our president express the best interest of the United States? What can citizens of the U.S. expect now that the Summit is over?

While the methods for implementation were vague, the goals for accomplishment were incredibly specific. Everything was promised to everyone. Indeed, the world forum sounded like a roomful of Al Gore’s, each one trying to outdo the other with how much they could pander to their audience of third world countries and socialist dictators. The underlying theme was simple: The world has problems. Only the U.N. can solve them. Give us the power. Sound familiar? It should. It’s the same mantra that liberals and socialists alike spew to the easily swayed masses who believe that rights, happiness, and prosperity begin with government programs and end with individual liberty.

The most deceptive aspect of all this, is the that U.N. is packaging their socialistic product in a box labeled "democracy." Let’s examine just a few of the details of the "U.N. Millennium Declaration" which was derived from the Summit.

Dictatorial Powers

The most frightening new direction the United Nations is taking after their summit is the change in which authority determines the deployment of peacekeeping missions. Traditionally, this authority has been the U.N. Security Council, a board consisting of the major heads of state. This allows the major contributing nations to decide whether or not certain deployments are worthy of their contributed resources. Most importantly, it gives the United States (the hands-down most generous contributor to the U.N. budget) a voice in where the world body will intervene around the world.

No longer. Now, peacekeeping decisions will be the sole authority of the U.N. bureaucracy—specifically, the Secretary General. This gives the United Nations unilateral power to deploy "peacekeeping" troops around the globe. No more input from the pesky United States. Nonetheless, the U.S. is still expected to pump exorbitant amounts of money, soldiers and resources into U.N. operations—only now we have no voice in how those resources are used. How does the Clinton/Gore administration feel about this castration? Let President Clinton tell you in his own words, in his address to the U.N. Security Council at the Millennium Summit.

"We must do more to equip the United Nations to do what we ask it to do. They need to be able to be peacekeepers who can be rapidly deployed, properly trained and equipped, able to project credible force. That, of course, is the thrust of the Secretary General’s report on peacekeeping reform. The United States strongly supports that report."

Apparently, the President has no problem signing away our national security, as well as the lives of American soldiers, to the United Nations.

The International Criminal Court

The U.N.’s International Criminal Court (ICC) gained some momentum at the Summit. This court would empower the United Nations to enforce its own rule of law. As stated in these pages before, the ICC would reign supreme over every other judicial system in the world—including that of the United States. The U.N. has vowed to hold every member of every nation accountable to this court, whether or not that nation ratifies it.

At the Summit, the Statute for the ICC was signed by an additional 12 countries and ratified by four. The statute now has a total of 110 signatures and 19 ratifications. This is nearly one third of the 60 total ratifications the ICC must have to enter into force.

Also stressed at the Summit, was the need for the United Nations to have its own fighting force for supposed peacekeeping missions. This army would consist of soldiers from varying nations—who would transform their allegiance to the U.N. This proposal has been labeled many things, most notably the U.N. refers to it as the "United Nations Rapid Deployment Police and Security Force" (UNRDF). In reality, this is no more than a U.N. standing army. With the International Criminal Court at its side, the UNRDF will be boundless in its operation.

A Turkey in Every Pot

The Millennium Summit also served as a stage for the leaders of the United Nations to gain support for their plans of eradicating poverty. Of course, no one likes poverty, however, the U.N.’s solutions to poverty-stricken areas resemble nothing more than a global "New Deal" list of entitlement programs. In their words: "Global challenges must be managed in a way that distributes the costs and burdens fairly in accordance with basic principles of equity and social justice." Translation: We must redistribute the wealth—welfare for all. Throughout their own report, the U.N. stressed the need for greater oversight of national governments, and stricter regulation of the private sector and civil society.

Through their grand, socialist redistribution scheme, the U.N. hopes to strengthen the dependency of less fortunate nations on the world body. Much like other totalitarian regimes, the United Nations knows that if they can control the flow of goods and services to the people—they can control the people themselves.

For his part, President Clinton also made global promises regarding education of all things. Unbelievably, Mr. Clinton wishes to force our own failed public education system on the entire world. In his speech to the Security Council he declared: "I strongly support the goal of universal access to primary education by 2015. We are helping to move toward that goal, in part, with our effort to provide school lunches to 9 million boys and girls in developing nations."

Global Warming

What would a Millennium Summit be without the good old "sky is falling" rhetoric about global warming? Even in the midst of overwhelming scientific evidence that shows manmade global warming to be a myth, in its declaration, the U.N. vows: "…to make every effort to ensure the entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol, preferably by 2002, and to embark on the required reduction in emissions of greenhouse gasses." President Clinton agreed: "We have to meet the challenge of climate change. I predict that within a decade—or maybe even a little less—that will become as big an obstacle to the development of poor nations as disease is today." Of course, Mr. Clinton is dead wrong in this respect. The biggest obstacle to poor nations would be the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol, as it would force developing countries to industrialize within the framework of massive restrictions on the amount of greenhouse gasses they could emit. How unfortunate that common sense wasn’t invited to attend the Summit.

The World Changed

In the end, the leaders of the United Nations left the Millennium Summit with a renewed sense of power and a mandate to implement the policies called for in the Charter for Global Democracy. Their mandate is the "U.N. Millennium Declaration"—a task list chock-full of global governance proposals. The Declaration was passed by general consensus, meaning no vote was taken and none of the proposals were debated. This document was simply waived in front of the General Assembly and heads of state, and passed by virtue of "hearing no objections." With no objections, the U.N. received authorization from the highest authority on earth—the world’s heads of state—to move forward with its agenda for global governance. No recorded vote was taken. In a sense, the world changed in early September—yet the U.S. Congress remains in the dark.

Sign the Freedom 21 Declaration



_____________________________

sic semper tyrannis

Post #: 1
RE: The UN - 11/27/2000 8:36:00 PM   
taxi driver

 

Posts: 1959
Joined: 2/24/1999
From: Biloxi, MS. U.S.A
Status: offline

I've known about this UN Charter for some time...it is amazing how many do not know about it...

It will be in full effect in less than 10 years...

And for anone who has not seen, heard, or read it, it is suggested reading...but be prepared to get angry...and rightly so...but not just because of the charter itself, but the fact that you have been kept in the dark, lied to, and sold out.....

And that's the good news...we haven't even talked about the universal code of ethics which mandates what you can and cannot so much as 'say'.....


dave


(in reply to scalpelman)
Post #: 2
RE: The UN - 11/28/2000 11:21:00 AM   
JT

 

Posts: 748
Joined: 10/29/1998
From: VENTURA,CA.USA
Status: offline
When a soldier enters the military I assume they go in feeling they are serving the United States/Constitution. Now, if a soldier is chosen to go fight/peacekeep for the UN what if anything can he do in a legal sense to fight this if all he wishes is to fight for the US and no one else? I know if I was a member of the armed forces I would have misgivings about going to serve someone other than my own goverment.

(in reply to scalpelman)
Post #: 3
RE: The UN - 11/28/2000 4:43:00 PM   
taxi driver

 

Posts: 1959
Joined: 2/24/1999
From: Biloxi, MS. U.S.A
Status: offline

jt-

This very thing happened a couple years ago. I don't remember the guys name, but it made worldwide news. He refused to take orders from a UN official citing that he did not sign up for that.

He was dishonorably discharge and made a public example of by no less than our draft-dodging commander-in-chief. This young man was repremanded by Clinton on worldwide news because he refused to take orders from a foreign officer....unbelievable.

Of course for Clinton this type treason is status quo, so it's really not surprise I guess...

dave


(in reply to scalpelman)
Post #: 4
RE: The UN - 12/1/2000 12:14:00 PM   
scalpelman

 

Posts: 423
Joined: 10/6/1998
From: Sequin
Status: offline
Unwelcome and Unwanted at the Hague
By Henry Lamb
(November 18 2000)

John Gummer is a former Minister of the Environment for the United Kingdom. He is a member of Parliament, and in Kyoto, he was a delegate representing the European Union in the development of the Kyoto Protocol. In an interview, he told me that "American sovereignty is of no account." He said "Don't talk to me about your sovereignty; your pollution is changing my climate."

Sovereignty International, the organization I represent at these U.N. meetings, is vitally concerned about the erosion of national sovereignty that occurs through international agreements such as the Kyoto Protocol. I was shocked by Mr. Gummer's disdain for the concept of national sovereignty.

In the United States, there is no brighter light, nor is there a more articulate spokesman for the virtues of national sovereignty than Dr. Alan Keyes. How valuable would it be to have the delegates at the Hague hear a debate between Dr. Keyes and Mr. Gummer, focusing precisely on the point of national sovereignty in relation to the Kyoto Protocol?

Sovereignty International, as an accredited NGO, requested the U.N. to schedule time during the Hague conference for this debate. Mr. Gummer agreed. Dr. Keyes agreed. The U.N. said no.

Events sponsored by NGOs at these meetings are quite common. At the last
The Sovereignty International display was at the end of this hall, down a flight of steps.
climate change conference, there were more than 200 of these NGO-sponsored side events. At this conference in the Hague, there are at least 100 of these NGO events. Why, then, was Sovereignty International not allowed to stage the Gummer-Keyes debate?

The official answer was "We have more requests than we can fill." Our request was made within days of the publication of the request form, more than 90 days before the conference. At the time our request was denied, 30 days before the conference, ours was 69 of 110 requests received.

At the same time we requested the special event, we also requested space for an exhibit. This request was granted. When we arrived at the Hague, we found more than 100 NGO exhibits, virtually all of which promote the Kyoto Protocol in one form or another. All of the exhibits are arranged in the halls around the primary meeting rooms - all, that is, except Sovereignty International's. Our space is down a long hall, beyond the meeting rooms, down a flight of stairs, out of sight.

Our display features a segment from the Republican Platform which says,
The other display area where most of the exhibits, and all of the people were.
essentially, that the Kyoto Protocol should not be implemented, surrounded by the names of dozens of organizations which concur with the statement. It is the only exhibit which expressly opposes the Kyoto Protocol. Was our display assigned to this no-traffic zone deliberately? Or was the assignment just the luck of the draw?

At COP 5, in Bonn last year, our display space was up a flight of stairs on a balcony overlooking the primary exhibit area where most of the displays were located. At COP 4, in Buenos Aires, we had no assignment at all when we
Dr. Bonner Cohen (left) is interviewed by Henry Lamb, for radio broadcasts. Sovereignty International completed 15 hours of live radio, on 18 programs, broadcast over nearly 1500 radio stations.
arrived, and it took four days for the U.N. to produce a table for our display, and then it was situated completely away from the other exhibitors, in a corner near the restrooms. As it turned out, this proved to be a pretty good location since everyone had to pass the display at one time or another.

The point of this sad saga is more than sour grapes. Dissenting information is not welcome at U.N. conferences. In fact, at the time a request is made for display space, the U.N. wants to see a complete set of the material that will be displayed. Material that supports the U.N. agenda is welcome; anything else is not.

Control over the flow of information is fundamental to socialist philosophy. It is a common practice within the United Nations system - to the maximum extent possible. While there is little we can do to change procedures at the U.N., we can, at the very least, tell the American people what is, and is not, happening at these U.N. meetings.

Had the delegates at the Hague been allowed to listen to Dr. Alan Keyes explain the virtues of national sovereignty, and how the decisions the delegates are taking this week may diminish freedom for every nation for all time - who know what impact his words might have had. We will never know. The U.N. had more requests than they could fill, and the Keyes-Gummer debate just happened to be one of the events that didn't occur.

Campaign

Membership preview

_____________________________

sic semper tyrannis


(in reply to scalpelman)
Post #: 5
RE: The UN - 12/1/2000 12:41:00 PM   
scalpelman

 

Posts: 423
Joined: 10/6/1998
From: Sequin
Status: offline
Virgina taxpayers oppose U.N. Day
The Virginia Taxpayers Association today claimed a "significant victory over Gov. Jim Gilmore in his dangerous promotion of one-world government."

The VTA said Gilmore's "order for Virginia observance of United Nations Day Oct. 24 was so unpopular around the state that neither the event nor the person Gilmore officially designated to head up the 'celebration' got a single mention in the local newspaper where the UN person lives."

The VTA is the state's leading critic of the UN, calling it a "totalitarian entity deliberately designed to destroy the U. S. legal system, our sovereignty and our freedom."

Senate Joint Resolution 120 originated by Gilmore in January had named Shelton H. Short III of Clarksville to lead United Nations Day in Virginia. Short was expected to mail out a news release across the commonwealth with favorable comment on the event. "But most state media including the Clarksville News-Progress covering Short's residence area conspicuously ignored UN Day, accurately reflecting Virginians' general distrust of the world body," the VTA said.

"A specially suspicious Gilmore action," the taxpayer association added, "was the governor's sudden cancellation Oct. 24 of his regular monthly statewide radio call-in show scheduled for only two days after UN Day. Evidently the governor did not want to answer questions from callers about why he is pushing world government, which is so subversive of the United States Constitution and Declaration of Independence for which our great Virginia founding fathers fought and died."

"After all, the monthly radio show is the governor's principal give-and-take live contact with the largest share of his constituents. It's therefore one his most important responsibilities. Why would he, for the first time, want to cancel this program because of some alleged 'conflict with work on the Bush campaign' where Gilmore's actions would be of much less importance to the citizens of Virginia?"

The taxpayer association emphasized, in a statement approved Saturday, Nov. 18 in Charlottesville, that "we cannot be satisfied with merely one-time helping to block celebration of the tyrannical United Nations. Its continuing activities are largely unreported by the major media. But they severely threaten our national security as well as our pocketbooks. The UN has already cost taxpayers over $100 billion since 1945."

"That's why VTA will seek a joint resolution in the 2001 Virginia General Assembly calling on Congress to withdraw from the United Nations. In Washington Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tex.) has already obtained 18 cosponsors of a House joint resolution to begin this process. It is urgent that all Virginia members of Congress sign on to this resolution when Representative Paul reintroduces it next year."

The VTA pointed out that the UN "is stepping up its advancing program to confiscate all citizens' guns, needed for our personal safety. Behind current Security Council arguments on UN troops, a UN standing army is already in existence. It's named SHIRBRIG (Stand-by Forces High Readiness Brigade) under command of Brig. Gen. Patrick Gammaert of the Royal Netherlands Marine Corps. Britain is offering training facilities."

"This rapid deployment force could be posted, at the sole discretion of Kofi Annan or his successor, at our Mexican border. There already is a massive invasion of illegal aliens, with traces extending to Virginia and many other states. The Mexican government, doubtless abetted by our traitors in Washington, likely will claim the illegals overrunning our border 'need UN protection' from outnumbered American ranchers trying desperately to protect their homes and property."

The UN General Assembly, the VTA noted, will take up establishment of an International Criminal Court Nov. 27. "This new court, now supported with reservations by the Clinton administration, would be given power to try U. S. citizens accused of war crimes, whatever such crimes might include. Accused individuals before foreign judges would have no Fifth Amendment protections, no right of trial by jury, no clear rules of evidence to use in their defense, Amendment protections, no right of trial by jury, no clear rules of evidence to use in their defense, no right of appeal to any other court. How much more will Americans tolerate before they decide the UN is too dangerous for us to participate in any longer?"

Regarding exit poll results broadcast by networks before all polls had closed, the VTA said "this sinister scam conducted by the secretive Voters News Service, controlled by the biased TV media and Associated Press, destroyed integrity of the election. This unlawful activity has been thoroughly exposed by Citizens for a Fair Vote Count (www.votefraud.org) and must be ended if we are to have any hope for fair elections."

"It's deplorable that Rep. Rick Boucher (D-9th) joined the notorious Marxist Hillary Clinton in originating corrupt propaganda to abolish the electoral system. Constitutional electors are absolutely essential to prevent our nation from being totally controlled by a few large population states."

The association will seek a General Assembly resolution opposing Virginia adoption of the "mind-destroying globalist ISO 9000 system for education purposes. Gilmore's dangerous support of UNESCO, which he followed in signing Virginia on to dictatorial School-to-Work and the Workforce Investment Act, sets up a requirement to be governed by the International Standards Organization (ISO)."

"The Maryland Department of Education is now implementing an ISO 9001 pilot program in much of the state. This will make schools 'service providers' for K-12 students and their prospective employers. These schools will be required to document every process from bus service to janitorial duties and every administrative and teacher function performed for every minute of the working day."

"Students will come out of schools where old curricula have been trashed. They will enter work places with minimum knowledge, skills and abilities. With the help of ISO, employers won't have to pay high salaries, provide expensive training or maintain the same amount of overhead. But the dumbed-down young graduates 'will be qualified to work in any country of the world.' That's where Gilmore wants Virginia children to end up if we don't stop him," the VTA emphasized.

Campaign

Membership preview

_____________________________

sic semper tyrannis


(in reply to scalpelman)
Post #: 6
RE: The UN - 12/8/2017 7:14:40 PM   
PIX2CLICK


Posts: 8004
Joined: 12/26/2001
From: ==== You can't pooh, pooh, Paducah ... ====
Status: offline
====

GREAT CONVERSATION ........... 17 YEARS AGO

RELEVANT TODAY

====

_____________________________

==== THE BIG BOSS HAS OFFICIALLY LISTED OL' PIX AS DTD (DAY TO DAY) ====




(in reply to scalpelman)
Post #: 7
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Other Sports] >> The Sports Bar >> The UN Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 Unicode

0.023