House Passes Bill to Slash Funds to U.N.

AP by Yahoo ^ | 6/17/2005 | JIM ABRAMS (AP)

[inquest]

It means reporting it without mentioning that “little” fact is not the whole truth. In other words, a lie.

If you mean that as a critique of the news source, then fine, each person has his own preferences for how many details are necessary in any given report. But in no sense does this alter the basic fact that LOST creates what amounts to a taxing authority, nor does it change the underlying nature of that authority simply because the U.S. executive branch (whoever that turns out to be at any given time) has veto power over those decisions.

[RedBeaconNY]

...how does that Vonage commercial go again?

Oh yes.

Woohoohooawoohoohoo!

[Jazzman1]

LIBERALS, your day is over. NPR and PBS are NEXT on the chopping block. WOO_HOO!!!!

[concerned about politics]

The 221-184 vote, which came despite a Bush administration warning that such a move could actually sabotage reform efforts

It's the Good cop/Bad cop game.

[Rockitz]

This is a good first step, which is hopefully followed up by a total US withdrawal until such time as reforms are made.

Rep. Jeff Fortenberry, R-Neb., won backing for an amendment under which the United States would use its influence to ensure that any member engaged in acts of genocide or crimes against humanity would lose its U.N. membership and face arms and trade embargoes.

This part is a must!

[concerned about politics]

Rep. Jeff Fortenberry, R-Neb., won backing for an amendment under which the United States would use its influence to ensure that any member engaged in acts of genocide or crimes against humanity would lose its U.N. membership and face arms and trade embargoes.

Good. I'd rather be a Muslim in Gitmo than a Christian in Saudi Arabia!!

[elfman2]

"But in no sense does this alter the basic fact that LOST creates what amounts to a taxing authority"

If you were to run a poll asking if we should sign a treaty to administer mining in international waters that’s self sufficient through levies on that activity with limitations set by the US president and you get one number. Simply ask if we should sign a treaty that enables the UN to tax impose the first world tax starting with mining activity in the oceans for redistribution to the rest of the world and the likely [hugh and series] difference between those two numbers indicates a lie, not a “preference on how many details to are necessary in a given report”. The lie’s not just due to the phrasing of the question, it’ due to a radical misrepresentation of the treaty. Intentional misrepresentation = lie.

[inquest]

It's different with polls, because you can only answer yes or no, and those two answers are going to suggest very different connotations from each other. But personally, I don't see anything inherently dishonest in pointing out that the treaty creates a UN taxing authority. If Congress could veto it, that would be different. But a mere presidential veto power amounts to very little security. Especially given that even the current President has not indicated that he would be vetoing any of it.

[elfman2]

"But a mere presidential veto power amounts to very little security. "

Perhaps, but it looks like those working to defeat UNCLOS unanimously think that presidential veto is enough security to neglect mentioning it. I recognize it and don’t like that weakness, but I don’t like being lied to, especially by Freepers.

I really didn’t come here to discuss this, just had a smart-ass comment about the funding reduction. I don’t need another research project now, but I’m certainly not going to trust the opinions of those who brought this one sided version up to me.

[Coleus]

USAID    UNESCO    UNFPA    UNICEF     UNEP    ICLEI    UN

 FTAA  LOST  GetUSOut  getusout.org  stoptheftaa  stopcafta

Oil-For-Food       Duelfer Report   Blood For Oil   Kojo

[hosepipe]

The U.N. is already in the process of makeing sham adjustments..
Guess the sham adjustments will be super-shammed..
They have absolutely NO intentions of make any real changes..

WHY?.. Americans in congress made an effort.. thats good enough.. the pressure is off..

[.cnI redruM]

>>>>U.S.-assessed dues account for about 22 percent of the >>>>U.N.'s $2 billion annual general budget

$440M tends to attract people's attention. If we cut 1/2 of that, I wonder who would fund them instead?

[AdamSelene235]

At the present moment, the UN could call on the world to do all kinds of things that would wipe out our economy.

Such as ?

Do you know what happens to the rest of the world if the US economy tanks?

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

"Do you know what happens to the rest of the world if the US economy tanks?"

Excellent question. And that is the only non-lethal leverage we have over the UN at the moment. But if we were to suddenly cut off funding completely, the UN would call on world wide sanctions, seizure of assets in foreign banks, seizure of businesses, arrests of US citizens overseas, etc. It's an economic doomsday concept. Just the fear of such draconian moves would cause stocks to plummet and our currency to spiral down at a fearful rate.

However, the UN's credibility is in freefall. So we can choke off some of the funding now-and-then. Slowly fading is not nearly as terrifying to the UN. Painfully frustrating to us, but not as dangerous, IMHO.

[AdamSelene235]

But if we were to suddenly cut off funding completely, the UN would call on world wide sanctions, seizure of assets in foreign banks, seizure of businesses, arrests of US citizens overseas, etc.

Yeah, right. We're talking about the organization that can't even pacify Somalia?

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

The UN is extremely swift and decisive when it comes to sticking it to the US. They initiate economic sanctions at the drop of a hat. And they absolutely love to arrest people who aren't leftist kamizars. Take their cash away, and I'm sure they'd do all in their power to inflict serious economic pain on us. Sure you want to see how much they'd hold back on us?

And even worse, are you sure they couldn't spread panic on Wall Street? We are grinding them down. Soon, we can get more bold.

[phillyfanatic]

Agreed. The UN is worthless and should be disbanded and reorganized as JFK, Nixon and MacArthur wanted it to be. That is, an organization of free world democratic states with invitations to all nations which want to join in under those circumstances. Of course, the Senate will derail this and RINO's will help derail it under the rubric that the UN is just misunderstood!!!!!!!