Posted on 03/08/2006 7:46:43 AM PST by Calpernia
At the 55th annual meeting of the United Nations General Assembly in New York City on September 5-9, 2000, called the Millennium Assembly and Summit, far-reaching plans are underway to turn the corner from a world of sovereign, independent nation-states to a world of disparate peoples subordinated to the supreme authority of the United Nations. These plans call for the total restructuring of the mission and powers of the United Nations.
To achieve this goal, the UN is scheduled to consider at least two actions, by consensus rather than by formal vote: adoption of the Earth Charter, a document whose text has evolved through several drafts since the Earth Summit in 1992, and adoption of a Declaration authorizing a new UN commission to implement recommendations to bring about global governance. Global governance means world government by incremental steps, chipping away at national sovereignty one treaty at a time, one world conference at a time, one UN commission at a time.
A portion of the Millennium Assembly is designated as the Millennium Summit, which President Bill Clinton and 160 heads of state are expected to attend, the largest gathering of heads of state in history. Also meeting at the same time at the New York Hilton will be Mikhail Gorbachev and his State of the World Forum, hoping to help induce heads of state to concur in the Millennium Assembly's historic actions. Gorbachev has been promoting world government ever since his 1992 speech at the Churchill Memorial in Fulton, Missouri, where he called for a "global structure," "a democratically organized world community," a "restructured" United Nations with "armed forces" and "substantial funding," and "some mechanism tying the UN to the world economy."
The Earth Charter's advocates talk as though it were the "Magna Carta" of a new regime, but it's not a regime of freedom from arbitrary kings like King John at Runnymede in 1215. It's a charter to submit Americans to global dictators possessing unprecedented powers.
The UN Millennium Assembly and Summit and its actions should be a major issue in the current presidential campaign since Al Gore has been an enthusiastic supporter of the Earth Charter during its years of development. Republican leaders have yet to be heard from.
The Earth Charter demands that we "demilitarize national security systems" (i.e., eliminate our armed services and their weapons). The Charter proclaims that its "Way Forward" requires "a change of mind and heart" as we move toward "global interdependence and universal responsibility."
The Charter demands that we adopt "sustainable development plans and regulations" (i.e., to subordinate human needs to global fads enforced by environment dictators), and that the UN "manage the use of renewable resources such as water, soil, forest products, and marine life . . . [to] protect the health of ecosystems" (i.e., not the health of mere humans).
The Charter demands that we "act with restraint and efficiency when using energy" (i.e., reduce U.S. energy use and lower our standard of living). The Charter requires that we "eradicate poverty," "promote the equitable distribution of wealth within nations and among nations," and "relieve them of onerous international debt" (i.e., redistribute U.S. wealth around the world and cancel the debts owed by recipients of U.S. foreign loans).
The Charter exhorts us to affirm "gender equality" and "eliminate discrimination in ... sexual orientation" (i.e., adopt the feminist and gay agendas). The Charter demands that we "integrate into formal education [i.e., assign a UN nanny to monitor our schools] ... skills needed for a sustainable way of life [i.e., indoctrination in how we must subordinate sovereignty to the UN dogma of sustainability]."
The Charter affirms that "all beings are interdependent" (i.e., personal freedom is irrelevant) and "every form of life has value regardless of its worth to human beings" (i.e., animals, plants and insects, but not unborn babies). The Charter demands that we "ensure universal [i.e., global] access to health care that fosters reproductive health [i.e., abortion and contraception] and responsible reproduction [i.e., UN-dictated population control]."
The Earth Charter won't be a treaty that the U.S. Senate can accept or reject. It will be "soft law," a policy document like the UN Declaration on Human Rights, which has no legal standing but gives globalists such as Bill Clinton and global environmentalists such as Al Gore the perch from which they exhort us to "fulfill our international obligations" (even though Americans never accepted such obligations).
The Declaration and Agenda for Action, subtitled "Strengthening the United Nations for the 21st Century," will also be considered by the Millennium Assembly and Summit. This lengthy document, which fleshes out the global plans in more detail, was developed by the UN-accredited Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) who call themselves the Millennium Forum.
The Declaration demands the disarmament of all conventional and nuclear weapons, the prohibition of "unilateral deployment of nationwide missile defense by any country," and a "standing Peace Force" (i.e., a UN standing army). It calls for a "UN Arms register" of all small arms and light weapons, and "peace education" covering "all levels from pre-school through university."
The Declaration calls for "eliminating" the veto and permanent membership in the Security Council so that the United States will be merely one of 160 nations. This would reduce the influence of the United States in the UN to that of Cuba or Haiti even though we pay the lion's share of the budget.
The Declaration calls for the UN to impose direct taxes such as a "currency transfer tax," a "tax on the rental value of land and natural resources," a "royalty on worldwide fossil energy production -- oil, natural gas, coal," "fees for the commercial use of the oceans, fees for airplane use of the skies, fees for use of the electromagnetic spectrum, fees on foreign exchange transactions (i.e. the Tobin Tax), and a tax on the carbon content of fuels."
The Declaration calls for "a fair distribution of the earth's resources" (from the United States to the rest of the world, of course), and for the "eradication of poverty" by "redistribution [of] wealth and land." It demands that we "cancel the debts of developing countries."
The Declaration demands UN "democratic political control of the global economy so that it may serve our vision" (i.e., control by 160 nations with the U.S. having only one vote). It calls for UN monitoring of U.S. implementation of Agenda 21 and the Copenhagen Declaration.
The Declaration demands that we "integrate" the World Trade Organization under UN control. All the talk we hear from politicians about "free trade" is just pap for the gullible; the goal is managed trade -- managed by UN bureaucrats.
The Declaration calls for implementing UN treaties that the United States has never ratified, including the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (which refuses to recognize the right to private property).
The Declaration calls for the unratified International Criminal Court (ICC) to exercise "compulsory jurisdiction" over all states, enforced by the UN Security Council. The ICC is so dangerous to the constitutional rights of Americans that even Bill Clinton declined to sign it after his Administration had spent years participating in writing and negotiating it. The ICC has been signed by a hundred countries, and now the ICC and the UN are impudently asserting jurisdiction over the United States even though we did not sign it.
The Declaration would impose "gender-based methodologies" as adopted at the UN Conference in Beijing.
All this and more of the same could be America's future under an Al Gore presidency.
These radical UN Plans, which originated with the UN-funded Commission on Global Governance, are promoted by the NGOs, the hundreds of private Non-Government Organizations that have attached themselves to the United Nations like leeches. The UN now accredits 1,603 NGOs. Accreditation is dependent on the organization declaring that its primary purpose is to "promote the aims, objectives, and purposes of the United Nations."
The NGOs are energetic lobbyists for dramatic changes in the mission and structure of the UN to achieve global governance. Most NGOs are also members of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), which originated many of the global environmental policies set forth in the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Convention on Climate Change, and Agenda 21. The most prominent NGOs are the radical environmental groups such as the Sierra Club and the feminist and population-control groups such as Planned Parenthood.
The leader of the UN's restructuring plans is a Canadian named Maurice Strong, who was Secretary General of the Earth Summit in Rio in 1992 and has built his power base among the NGOs. Secretary-General Kofi Annan appointed him Executive Coordinator of UN Reform.
The NGOs work the corridors of the United Nations headquarters in New York like typical corporate lobbyists. Persistent lobbying has made the NGOs very influential at the various UN conferences, including the Children's Summit in New York in 1990, the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, the Human Rights Conference in Vienna in 1993, the Population Conference in Cairo in 1994, the Social Summit in Copenhagen in 1995, the Conference on Women in Beijing in 1995, the Habitat II Conference in Istanbul in 1996, and the World Food Summit in Rome in 1996.
Maurice Strong and the NGOs publicized their extraordinary plans to achieve global governance through the UN in a 410-page report called Our Global Neighborhood, issued in 1995 by the Commission on Global Governance. This document states (p. 359) that the plans to "strengthen" the UN into global government originated with former West German Socialist Chancellor Willy Brandt.
The UN bureaucrats and NGOs have been working ever since on a Charter for Global Democracy to build the framework for a restructured UN, and the plans are now being crystallized in the Earth Charter and the Declaration described above.
The NGOs worked for several years under the name NGO Forum and are now becoming the People's Assembly, as recommended by the Commission on Global Governance. This body of unelected pressure groups with leftwing political agendas is supposed to be formally attached to the UN during the Millennium Assembly. Pompously calling themselves the "civil society," they claim to be the voice of the people, in contrast to the General Assembly, which consists of the representatives of national governments. The NGOs dream of becoming the real power in the UN, bypassing the official representatives of nations.
Clinton Administration representatives at the United Nations are always very supportive of expanded UN powers. U.S. Ambassador to the UN Richard Holbrooke says that "the United Nations must transform its civilian-run peacekeeping department into a larger and more effective military-style operation ..." (New York Times, 6-14-00)
The UN bureaucrats and NGOs are skillful with semantics, and their goal of world government is waffled with words that have specialized meanings but may appear non-threatening. Their jargon words used in a positive connotation are sustainable (their favorite word), global, interdependent, civil society, environmental, inclusive, diversity, common good, demilitarize, fair distribution, international, and universal responsibility. Among the jargon words always used negatively are production and consumption. Forbidden words include independence, freedom and sovereignty.
Many UN and NGO documents confirm the goals and plans of these tireless promoters of global governance in six areas:
* Using the rubric "Peace, Security and Disarmament," the UN wants to establish a UN standing army under the command of the UN Secretary-General, with the ultimate goal of disarming national armies. The UN reformers want to eradicate national sovereignty as a barrier to UN action and use the shibboleth "security of the people" to rationalize UN action inside sovereign countries (as in Kosovo). The plan is to transform sovereign countries into administrative units assigned to carry out UN policies. The UN even wants disarmament of personal guns, with the UN controlling the manufacture, sale, distribution and licensing of all firearms. * In the area called "Eradication of Poverty," the UN wants debt cancellation for poor countries plus Western-financed social development. This means forcing the United States to turn over our wealth to UN bureaucrats to distribute to Third World dictators. * Under the do-good caption "Human Rights," the UN plans to enforce its version of global human rights through UN treaties, each of which has its own international compliance commission. These include the UN treaties on the Rights of the Child, on Discrimination Against Women, on Civil and Political Rights, on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and on the International Criminal Court (ICC). * The heading "Sustainable Development" is designed to facilitate total UN control of the environment. In addition to bootstrapping power to the globalists under the unratified Biodiversity Treaty and Kyoto (Global Warming) Protocol, the plan is to use the UN Trusteeship Council to control the "global commons," which is UN terminology for the atmosphere, outer space, non-territorial seas, and the related environment that supports human life. * "Globalization to Achieve Equity, Justice and Diversity" is a catch-all phrase to achieve any other power-grabbing goal the UN and NGO bureaucrats may dream up in the future. They want the authority to equalize rich and poor economies and pretend that redistribution of wealth is equity. * "Strengthening and Democratizing the United Nations" is doubletalk for wiping out all power and influence that the United States might ever exercise in the United Nations. This goal calls for eliminating the veto and permanent member status in the Security Council and giving the UN the power to tax so that it will no longer depend on nations' appropriating funds to pay their dues. UN bureaucrats are salivating over the prospect of passing the Tobin Tax, the brainstorm of James Tobin who lobbied for it during the Copenhagen Summit in 1995. This plan to tax all international financial transactions would funnel an extraordinary $1.5 trillion a year to the UN. Other targets of UN taxing plans include international airline tickets, sea-shipped freight, and ocean fishing. * Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Jesse Helms has been calling for the United Nations to reform itself and reduce its bloated budgets. But the UN "reform" agenda, now headed by Maurice Strong, is certainly very different from what Senator Helms has in mind.
What can Americans do to preserve our independence and sovereignty? Here are some first steps that should be taken immediately:
The UN Millennium plans must be made an issue with all presidential and congressional candidates. Urge them to pledge to repudiate global governance goals, all proposed UN treaties, and all acceptance of the authority of UN commissions or committees.
* Demand endorsement of a law requiring that, if the UN tries to impose any direct tax, the United States shall immediately withdraw from the UN and expel it from our country.
* Demand a pledge to oppose or reject all UN proposed treaties, specifically those on the International Criminal Court, Global Warming (Kyoto), Biodiversity, the Rights of the Child, Discrimination Against Women, Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Nuclear Test Ban, and any purported extension of the defunct 1972 ABM Treaty.
* Demand endorsement of the American Servicemembers' Protection Act, sponsored by Senator Jesse Helms, to cut off U.S. military aid to any country that ratifies the International Criminal Court treaty, prohibit U.S. forces from participating in UN peacekeeping operations unless expressly immunized from ICC jurisdiction by a UN Security Council resolution, and authorize the President to undertake any means "necessary and appropriate" to free U.S. soldiers from ICC captivity.
The liberty, independence and sovereignty of America are at stake.
It still doesn't mean anything.
They did something though that got around that.
THAT is what I'm trying to figure out.
None of this stuff is blatantly in one place and they further hide info under micro organizations.
Whatever these 'initiatives' are that are cripping into our systems get audited and monitored by UN Agents.
The U.N. Plan for Your Community
"...current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class - involving high meat intake use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work-place air-conditioning, and suburban housing - are not sustainable. A shift is necessary. which will require a vast strengthening of the multilateral system, including the United Nations..." [1] Maurice Strong , opening speech at the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development
Agenda 21, the UN blueprint for global transformation, sounds good to many well meaning people. Drafted for the purpose of creating "sustainable societies", it has been welcomed by nations around the world. Political, cultural, and media leaders have embraced its alluring visions of social justice and a healthy planet. They hide the lies behind its doomsday scenarios and fraudulent science. Relatively few consider the contrary facts and colossal costs.
After all, what could be wrong with preserving resources for the next generation? Why not limit consumption and reduce energy use? Why not abolish poverty and establish a global welfare system to train parents, monitor intolerance, and meet all our needs? Why not save the planet by trading cars for bikes, an open market for "self-sustaining communities," and single dwellings for dense "human settlements" (located on transit lines) where everyone would dialogue, share common ground, and be equal?
The answer is simple. Marxist economics has never worked. Socialism produces poverty, not prosperity. Collectivism creates oppression, not freedom. Trusting environmental "scientists" who depend on government funding and must produce politically useful "information" will lead to economic and social disaster. 3
Even so, local and national leaders around the world are following the UN blueprint for global management and "sustainable communities," and President Clinton is leading the way. A letter I received from The President's Council on Sustainable Development states that -
In April 1997, President Clinton asked the council to advise him on: next steps in building a new environmental management system for the 21st century... and policies that foster U.S. leadership on sustainable development internationally. The council was also charged to ensure that social equity issues are fully integrated ... (Emphasis added)
Many of our representatives are backing his plan. In a 1997 letter congratulating the Local Agenda 21 Advisory Board in Santa Cruz for completing their Action Plan, Congressman Sam Farr wrote,
The Local Agenda 21 Action Plan not only has local significance, it also will have regional and national impacts. As you know, the President's Council on Sustainable Development is beginning Phase III of its work with an emphasis on sustainable communities.4 (emphasis added)
This agenda may already be driving your community ís "development", so be alert to the clues. Notice buzzwords such as "visioning," "partners," and "stakeholders." Know how to resist the consensus process. Ask questions, but don't always trust the answers. Remember, political activists, like self-proclaimed education "change agents", have put expediency above integrity. As North Carolina school superintendent Jim Causby said at a 1994 international model school conference, "We have actually been given a course in how not to tell the truth. You've had that course in public relations where you learn to put the best spin on things."5
To recognize and resist this unconstitutional shadow government of laws and regulations being imposed on our nation without congressional approval, take a closer look at its history and nature.
Agenda 21
This global contract binds governments around the world to the UN plan for changing the ways we live, eat, learn, and communicate - all under the noble banner of saving the earth. Its regulations would severely limit water, electricity, and transportation - even deny human access to our most treasured wilderness areas. If implemented, it would manage and monitor all lands and people. No one would be free from the watchful eye of the new global tracking and information system
This agenda for the 21st Century was signed by 179 nations at the UN Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. Among other things, it called for a Global Biodiversity Assessment of the state of the planet. Prepared by the UN Environmental Programme (UNEP), this GBA armed UN leaders with the "information" and "science" they needed to validate their global management system. Its doomsday predictions were designed to excuse radical population reduction, oppressive lifestyle regulations, and a coercive return to earth-centered religions as the basis for environmental values and self-sustaining human settlements.
The GBA concluded on page 763 that "the root causes of the loss of biodiversity are embedded in the way societies use resources." The main culprit? Judeo-Christian values. Chapter 12.2.3 states that-
This world view is characteristic of large scale societies, heavily dependent on resources brought from considerable distances. It is a world view that is characterized by the denial of sacred attributes in nature, a characteristic that became firmly established about 2000 years ago with the Judeo-Christian-Islamic religious traditions.
Eastern cultures with religious traditions such as Buddhism, Jainism and Hinduism did not depart as drastically from the perspective of humans as members of a community of beings including other living and non-living elements.6
Maurice Strong, who led the Rio conference, seems to agree. His ranch in Colorado is a gathering place for Buddhist, Bahai, Native American, and other earth-centered religions. Yet, while spearheading the restructuring of the United Nations (see " World Heritage Protection?"), he also helped design the blueprint for the transformation of our communities. And in his introduction to The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide, he called local leaders around the world to "undertake a consultative process with their populations and achieve a consensus on 'Local Agenda 21' for their communities."
Achieving that consensus meant painting scary scenarios of a hurting, dying planet that frighten children, anger youth, and persuade adults to submit to the unthinkable regulations. (See "Saving the Earth") It means blaming climate change on human activities and ignoring the natural factors that have - throughout time - brought cyclical changes in climate, storm patterns, wildlife migration, and ozone thinning (there has never been a "hole").
More:
http://www.crossroad.to/text/articles/la21_198.html
Thanks for the Ping.
as of June 30, 2004 |
The following organizations in the U.S. have endorsed the Earth Charter as of June 30, 2004. ECUSA receives endorsements from a variety of sources: email, (from our own web site and the international website, www.earthcharter.org), fax, regular mail and from the Orion Grassroots Network (www.oriononline.org). We will continue to refine the list and update it regularly. If you don't see your organization listed, and want to be, please let us know, at info@earthcharterusa.org.
To learn more about endorsing the Earth Charter and to see a list of international endorsers, please see www.earthcharter.org/endorse/.
Is there no waking up from this nightmare?
What are your thoughts on posts 21 and 22?
More endorsements listed here:
http://www.oriononline.org/pages/ogn/earthcharter/endorsees.html
When you look at the history of the UN, you will see that their only real enforcement power has always been the United States military. Unless the president and the senate cede American sovereignty, I don't think there is much to worry about.
What about Michael New?
Forget the courts. Forget the ballot box. It should be clear to anyone by now that they have been co-opted by the enemies of Sovereignty, Independence, and Liberty.
The enemy has been operating right under noses with impunity for decades. We waited too long to mandate accountability and exact justice.
It is really the fault of we the people that it has come to this. What to do to remedy the situation at this late date? Durned if I know.
We've allowed them to destroy our congress back in the '50's. We've allowed them to usurp the Constitution with the 17th Amendment way back yonder. We continually allow them to whittle away at the remnants of liberty and freedom.
We are no longer a self-determined people. Few there be who even have the will to sit down and write about what should have been and could have been.
Count yourself among the surviving few who have any idea what the founders created for us -- and among the mourners who learned too late what was lost.
From what I can tell, Michael New is probably a pawn of some xenophobes and doesn't really understand what his duties are.
Well, I'm not giving up yet.
I'm familiary (a little) with the temporary command. I read about it often when I do the ProCoalition/Multinational forces ping lists.
But from what I saw on Michael New's site, this sounds a little different. I think you reference to pawn may be more accurate. The significance seems to be the date. The date this happened was during the development of the Earth Charter and our relationship with it.
Your work is most excellent!
Thanks; but I wouldn't call copy and paste work. I would love to make this more productive work.
From what I've read, Michael New has too "good" a legal team to have come up with this on his own. I think he is doing this at someone's behest. They may have just been looking for somebody gullible enough to go along with it.
I'm not sure, does he have blond hair?
Marines need to be sent to occupy that bolshevik building in New York and place everyone of the delegates and staff members, cooks and bottle washers in a POW Camp. Then tear the building down one brick at a time and toss it into the river.
I can't believe we STILL put up with that assinine organization called the UN.
NOTE TO ME: look up rockefeller/strong....korea/china (Yakuza?) and baca ranch
Microscoping Maurice Strong
by Judi McLeod
Saturday, April 23, 2005
Canadian businessman and UN envoy Maurice Strong is one weird dude.
Weird in his sidekicks. Mikhail Gorbachev, for one. The former Soviet leader and the Canuck really believe they can replace the Ten Commandments with their overstated Earth Charter,
Weird in his handpicked protégés. Try Canadas Prime Minister Paul Martin, the career politician whose one and only trip to the election polls as Canadian PM reduced the powerful Liberal Party to minority status. This, after assuming the mantle left by the departure of Jean Chrétien in pomp and splendour Indian smudging ceremonies, addressed by Irish rock star, Bono. Martins surrealistic ascension to the Prime Ministers Office (PMO) had such an emotional impact on Strong that he wept.
Strong actually teared up at the mention of Martin in the PMO on Canadas state-controlled television network, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC), which ran a special, called the Life and Times of Maurice Strong just three months after Martins December 12, 2003 swearing-in ceremony. In the special, CBC reporter Ann-Marie McDonald gushed about how Strong was a special guest in the still Gorbachev controlled Kremlin and how he came away with a saber-shaped bottle of brandy from Joseph Stalins special stock.
McDonald went on to describe Strong as "a cross between Rasputin and Machiavelli", "the Michelangelo of networking" and an "international traveling salesman with buts of paper in his pocket".
In spite of all of these monikers, Strong, McDonald said, "refuses to be pigeon holed".
You can call it weird from whence Strong came in the world of business. He was spawned by the Montreal-based Power Corporation, whose CEO Paul Desmarais is a key figure in BNP Paribas, Saddam Husseins favourite bank and part of the oil-for-food investigation.
Martin, who was hired by Strong, got his start in business from the same source, and because of it ended up as the owner of Canada Steamship Lines. While Strong, now Martins senior advisor in the House of Commons is Martins long time mentor, the duo is so close that the men are, in some speculative quarters, alleged but unproven half brothers.
Strong is weird in the kind of advisors from whom he says he takes his counsel. For example, "Koreagate Man" Tongsun Park, with whom he admits he has continued to maintain a relationship, and who Strong said in a written statement, advised him on "North Korean issues in my role as a U.N. envoy." In other words, Strong was taking advice from a man the U.S. Attorneys Office is looking to arrest for allegedly accepting millions of dollars from the Iraqi government while operating in the U.S. as an unregistered agent for Baghdad.
Youd think "the Michelangelo of networking" could do better for himself than that.
Strong is weird in the kind of international assignments he lands. What really qualifies him to conduct UN reform? Precisely what credentials does Strong really have to be dispatched by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan to global hot spots like North Korea, and what is he doing when hes in China?
It is weird that Strong advocates for world depopulation schemes; tells the unwashed masses that both refrigeration and air conditioning are going to wipe out Mother Earth. Its weird that as a practicing New Ager, Strong dabbles in the occult. Weird is that he didnt know one of the largest American aquifers was sitting right under the 100,000-acre Baca Ranch in Colorado, he ran as a New Age Mecca with his wife Hanne, and that he came to acquire the property through Saudi arms dealer Adnan Koshoggi.
Weirdest of all is the spin that comes with the Maurice Strong package. The kind of spin about Strong that comes from Nicholas Sonntag, a Canadian who heads up the Beijing office of CH2M Hill, one of the worlds leading environment companies. Sonntag has said of Strongs business in China: "They (China) are taking a big risk. Theyre determined to be the economic engine of the world. This is why Maurice is here--to help them think things through."
Why would an entire country rely on one man to "help them think things through"?
Its a kind of spin that only the pros at Fox News OReilly Factor could stop. It shouldnt matter that Strong is a Canadian spinmeister when it was the Rockefeller family that gained him entree to the United Nations.
Now that a link has been proven between Strong and Park, watch for senior UN officials to begin distancing themselves from "the man with the rolodex to die for".
We can only hope that the mainline media does not forget that Kofi and Mo are the Frick and Frack of the fairytale world in Manhattan. Back in 1997, Maurice Strongs UN offices were within spitting distance, just down the hall from those of Kofi Annans.
Even now, spin-doctor Annan is blaming everything but the UN for the oil-for-food scandal. Annan was only yesterday holding up the "Hes Innocent!" placard, and complimenting Strong just for cooperating with the independent probe panel investing oil-for-food.
What choice does Strong have but to cooperate with the probe? He may be Envoy God to Annan, but not to serious investigators.
Even in Canada where hes senior advisor to the prime minister, average Canadians know little about Strong, who is remembered most for trying to use their tax dollars to purchase a Costa Rican rain forest when he was running Ontario Hydro.
Strong is out there alright, but somewhere in all the either and the fog.
In the end it could have been the weirdness of Maurice Strong as described by those media outlets Strong catalogued as believing in black helicopter conspiracies that inadvertently kept him covered in a fog.
Its time for Maurice Strong to be dragged in out of the fog and examined close up if only to ascertain who and what he really is.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.