Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why Americans' Distrust of U.N. Grows
NewsMax ^ | 3/4/04 | Wes Vernon

Posted on 03/04/2004 11:20:14 AM PST by Tumbleweed_Connection

Growing anti-Americanism in the United Nations has sparked a backlash in this country. No longer is this debate an intellectual parlor game. Much of grassroots America sees the globalist body as a danger to its safety and survival. has been tracking this development and watching it grow.

First and foremost, of course, is the fact that after 9/11, the United Nations tried to block America’s effort to protect itself in removing the bloodthirsty Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein from power. This obstructionism came despite repeated evidence that Hussein had given aid and comfort to and made common cause with terrorist organizations throughout the world that want to kill Americans.

That the U.N. refused to approve this move, notwithstanding the fact that the Iraqi regime had repeatedly violated the world body’s own resolutions, once again revealed that the former would-be “last best hope for peace on Earth” harbors an unabashedly anti-American prejudice.

Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, who continues to wage a campaign to get the U.S. out of the U.N. and vice versa, agrees with President Bush that America “has an absolute right to defend itself” and that “we do not need permission from the U.N. or anybody else to use military force.”

Where the congressman parts company with the president is the very idea that the commander-in-chief would go to the United Nations and seek its "permission" in the first place for the very right to protect ourselves.

“When we seek permission or even mere approval from the United Nations,” the lawmaker says, “we give credibility to the terrible notion that American national security is a matter of international consensus.”

The president ultimately did what he had to do anyway, but Congressman Paul believes that in first going to the U.N. before acting, the White House was sending mixed messages.

The United Nations' anti-Americanism has become so routine and notorious that diplomats and journalists hardly talk about it anymore.

The Taliban in New York

Criminologist Harvey Kushner, a respected terrorism analyst and professor at Long Island State University, was recently quoted in New American magazine as charging that the U.N. “provides cover [for terrorism] almost the same way the Taliban does. It serves as the laboratory, the linchpin for legitimizing incendiary rhetoric” against the United States while boosting this country’s enemies.

Consider, for example, that U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan has praised Fidel Castro’s communist Cuba, which has vowed solidarity with some of the world’s worst terrorists. Castro’s island prison, Annan intoned, is a regime that “has set an example we can all learn from.” That Cuba is on the U.S. State Department’s list of terrorist-sponsoring nations bothers Annan not in the least. reported warnings to this country and its leaders in 2001 that Annan was no friend of the United States. President Bush, then in the Oval Office for just a few weeks, nonetheless gave U.S. approval for Annan to serve another term as secretary-general, perhaps believing that the anti-American culture at the United Nations was so pervasive as to make it difficult to find someone electable there who would not be even worse.

President Bush has come under fire from the hard left throughout the world and here in the U.S. for his refusal to bow to International Criminal Court. This U.N. creation could put Americans, in and out of uniform, at the mercy of a judicial body halfway around the world that offers none of the constitutional protections our own courts provide, such as trial by jury and the assumption of innocence until guilt is proven.

The president also took hits for his refusal to sacrifice American jobs to the Kyoto “global warming” treaty, a document grounded in what many climatologist and other experts believe to be junk science.

Secretary Chao's Warning

And conservatives are pleased that the Bush administration has at least one top Cabinet official who bluntly warns that the U.N. is a threat to this nation’s sovereignty. NewsMax reported from the recent CPAC convention where Labor Secretary Elaine Chao spoke of efforts by organized labor’s leadership to involve the U.N. in domestic wage-and-hour issues in this country.

She also mentioned that Ralph Nader, who has since announced he is running for president, wanted a globalist “consumer protection” agency through the auspices of the United Nations, another excuse for international bureaucrats to harass American business and kill American jobs.

Granted, President Bush has no sympathy for the “trust the U.N. to solve everything” mentality of the Clinton/Albright years. Nonetheless Congressman Paul is “disappointed that the president has chosen to entangle the American people with the United Nations by rejoining UNESCO. For decades,” the lawmaker reminded his House colleagues, “UNESCO has promoted its anti-American ‘education’ agenda’ with our tax dollars.”

That was why President Reagan withdrew the U.S. from this intrusive globalist agency years ago.

Congressman Paul complains the U.N. wants to influence our domestic policies on the environment, trade, labor, taxes, courts and a standing army.

More recently, the United Nations expressed a desire to gain control of the Internet. U.N. bureaucrats are unhappy that those who coordinate the Web's traffic have a “bias” in favor a private property. And that of course is antithetical to the plans of globalists who dream of a socialist “one world.”

Whether by sounding well-publicized alarms, or through urging the withholding of U.S. taxpayer dollars, or by calling for the U.S. to withdraw from the U.N., more mainstream officials in the Bush administration, Congress and (as NewsMax has reported) state Legislatures believe it is time to tell the international body to back off.

TOPICS: Foreign Affairs

1 posted on 03/04/2004 11:20:17 AM PST by Tumbleweed_Connection
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection

2 posted on 03/04/2004 11:28:46 AM PST by Joe Brower (The Constitution defines Conservatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
I don't really distrust the U.N. specifically. They are an Anti-American, communist organization and I distrust all Anti-American, communist organizations. It's a matter of principle (and experience).
3 posted on 03/04/2004 11:34:46 AM PST by templar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Criminologist Harvey Kushner, a respected terrorism analyst and professor at Long Island State University, was recently quoted in New American magazine as charging that the U.N. “provides cover [for terrorism] almost the same way the Taliban does. It serves as the laboratory, the linchpin for legitimizing incendiary rhetoric” against the United States while boosting this country’s enemies.

This paragraph not only applies to the UN, it also applies to the democrat party which has decided we should not defend ourselves without the permission of the UN or a world body but also thinks it's quite fine to leave people like Saddam and Arrested in power and defending them to the hilt.

Because the democrats are too CHICKEN to go after terrorists, they are putting the people of this country in danger and our troops in Iraq in danger.

While the democrats spend time attacking the President for doing what is necessary to get the terrorists, the terrorists are rooting for John Kerry to win the election so they (terrorists) will feel safer.
4 posted on 03/04/2004 11:34:55 AM PST by BMC1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BMC1
* * * *

The United Nations Wants to TAX you!


"Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali ... urged the [UN] to consider imposing its own taxes to become less dependent on the United States...."

-Washington Times, January 16, 1996

Are you concerned that...
...numerous taxation schemes to finance the UN are being considered?

Economist James Tobin proposed in 1972 that the UN be the recipient of a tax of 0.05% on foreign exchange transactions. In 1993, the Ford Foundation produced Financing an Effective United Nations, a report containing recommendations that the UN tax airline traffic, shipping, and arms sales. In 1995, the UN-funded Commission on Global Governance suggested that the UN collect levies from those who use "flight lanes, sea lanes for ships, ocean fishing areas, and the electromagnetic spectrum." Ultimately, of course, the burden of all taxation falls on consumers.

Are you concerned that...
...a State Department study specifically proposed giving the UN taxing power and, ultimately, control of the world?

In 1962, the State Department financed a study entitled "A World Effectively Controlled by the United Nations." The report outlined what would be needed for such a total world government: "a mandatory universal membership," an ability to use "physical force," and "compulsory jurisdiction" of its courts. One of the UN's "principle features," stated the report, would be "enforceable taxing powers." (Emphasis added.)

Are you concerned that... matter how much our nation gives, the UN will never be satisfied?

In addition to hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars in foreign aid, our nation has provided the UN with tens of billions more for its programs since 1945. Currently, U.S. contributions make up 25% of the UN's annual budget. But, in his May 2001 speech at Notre Dame University, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan complained with a typical anit-American attitude, "It is shameful that the United States ... should be one of the least generous in terms of helping the world's poor."

Are you concerned that...
...taxing authority would fuel an unaccountable UN Superstate?

Former UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali said of a UN tax: "We would no be under the daily financial will of member states who are unwilling to pay up." UN Founder Harlan Cleveland made the same point in Futures: Rather than relying on "the worn-out policy of year-to-year decisions by individual governments" (about how much to give the UN), "what's needed is a flow of funds for development which are generated automatically under international control." And there would be no Congress to limit the UN's appetite for your tax dollars!

Property Rights

The United Nations Wants to Take Your Land!
"Private land ownership ... contributes to social injustice.... Public control of land use is therefore indispensable."

- United Nations "Habitat I" Conference Report, 1976

5 posted on 03/05/2004 6:30:38 AM PST by Happy2BMe (U.S.A. - - United We Stand - - Divided We Fall - - Support Our Troops - - Vote BUSH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection; Tailgunner Joe; carenot; sheltonmac; GeronL; Txslady
Thanks for posting this.
6 posted on 03/05/2004 9:22:12 AM PST by The_Eaglet (Conservative chat on IRC:
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson