Obama's globalist wish list

WND ^ | December 24, 2008 | Phyllis Schlafly

[Joiseydude]

When candidate Barack Obama declared himself a "citizen of the world" before thousands of cheering German socialists, and later pledged to "rejoin the world community," those weren't just his usual platitudes about "change." Those words sounded the trumpet for his specific and far-reaching globalist agenda.

Obama plans to use his presidential power to get the Democratic-majority Senate to ratify a series of treaties that would take us a long way toward global rule over our money, our laws, our military, our courts, our customs, our trade and even our use of energy. Here are the treaties he says he wants.

[tbpiper]

Obama has so much crap to shill I fully expect Billy Mays to be the Whitehouse spokesman.

[TLI]

The article "in a hurry."

The U.N. Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST), which Ronald Reagan rejected in 1982

Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, which was signed by Bill Clinton but rejected by the Senate in 1999.

new Global Warming Treaty began to be written at the U.N. Climate Change Conference in Poland in order to replace the Kyoto Agreement, which George W. Bush and our Senate refused to ratify.

U.N. Treaty on Women, known as CEDAW. It was signed by Jimmy Carter in 1980 and persistently promoted by Hillary Clinton, but the Senate has so far had the good judgment to refuse to ratify it.

U.N. Treaty on the Rights of the Child, which was signed in 1995 by Bill Clinton but wisely never ratified by our Senate.

Little wonder Hussein The Magnificent will be pushing every garbage treaty designed to destroy America...


I can not conceive of any "President" that could ever be more capable of causing an internal war/revolution.

[Twotone]

I’m surprised she didn’t mention the one on limiting (or banning) small arms. Can’t remember the name of it off-hand. It’s the one that worries me the most!

[Joiseydude]

I believe that’s in the Global Poverty Act.

[Twotone]

I did a search & found it was included under the comprehensive nuclear test ban:

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/gadis3335.doc.htm

I don’t doubt that they’ll put it in *every* treaty just to get it through.

[Gandalf_The_Gray]

I’m surprised she didn’t mention the one on limiting (or banning) small arms. Can’t remember the name of it off-hand. It’s the one that worries me the most!

I don't agree because the UN would be incapable of enforcing any such treaty. If they sent in some "Blue Helmets" to round up the millions of American civilian firearms they would find that those Blue Helmets make excellent 10 ring targets.

I'm more concerned with the proposal to put a UN "tax" on international money transfers. If the UN ever freed themselves from relying on donations for funding and gave themselves the power to "tax" they would truly have crossed the Rubicon and gone from merely annoying to truly dangerous.

Would a standing army be the next agenda item? Followed by international control of all nuclear weapons...

Regards,
GtG