Our message to the U.N.:
Defund, Denounce, Deport, Disarm, Disband!
Posted on 03/12/2002 8:30:40 AM PST by Stand Watch Listen
Next week, March 18 through March 21, is going to determine whether liberty continues to exist in the world or whether everyone will fall pray to the schemes of the United Nations to become a one-world government imposing a New World Order.
My friend, Henry Lamb, the chairman of Sovereignty International, [www.sovereignty.net] recently wrote about the similarities between Hitler's mad dreams of global dominance and the United Nations' careful, slow creep and crawl toward the same goal. In the end, just as the United States and its allies put an end to Herr Hitler's villainy, the US remains the only power on Earth capable of ending the nightmare of enslavement by the global government plotters and schemers in the United Nations.
Consider the list of world conferences the United Nations has sponsored in just the passed decade. Conferences on children (1990); on the environment (1992); on human rights (1993); on global governance (1993 & 1995); on world trade (1994); on world population (1994); on social development (1995); on sustainable development (1995); on women (1995); on human habitats (1996); on global warming (1996); on the International Criminal court (1998); and its Millennium Assembly and Summit in 2000. There was an aborted conference on racial prejudice in 2001 that was so filled with hatred it swiftly sank into the mire of its own hypocrisy.
Let me borrow a sentence from the Declaration of Independence, by action of the Second Continental Congress, July 4, 1776: "But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security."
The United States fought the War of Independence over the issue of "taxation without representation." Who represents you at the United Nations? A single appointed ambassador! With one vote in the General Assembly!
Next week, in Monterey, Mexico, the UN High Level Panel of Financing Development will meet. The United Nations was set up to be financed by dues from its member states, but the UN has been cautiously working toward becoming financially independent of its own members by imposing a series of taxes that would increase its income by trillions.
These taxes would include those on international and other air transportation, the use of all coal, oil and natural gas, taxes on all currency transactions, and a dozen others they have lined up such as taxes on weapons exports, the Internet, and who knows what else?
The UN Conference in Mexico will propose consolidating all international financial and development institutions under its control. If the UN were to control which nations receive development funding and which do not, it will have a total chokehold on the future over every nation. It will even propose that immigrants will have to pay taxes not only to their new nation of residence, but the one from which they may well have fled!
With trillions, the cabal that runs the United Nations would no longer have to take notice of the United States or any other nation. It would soon be putting together its own vast military force capable of invading any nation to impose its will. The UN already has an International Court that already claims jurisdiction over every nation and its citizens, even if that nation is not a signatory to the conference that created it.
What is at stake here is the prospect of raw, unlimited power in the hands of people who are not elected by anyone other than themselves, if they can get their hands on the money to achieve this goal!
Who would support such an obscenity? How about former President Clinton's Deputy Secretary of State, Strobe Talbot, who said, "Nationhood as we know it will be obsolete, all states will recognize a single, global authority, and national sovereignty wasn't such a great idea after all."
Multiply Talbot by the unknown, countless people in Congress and elsewhere throughout our government, along with others ranging from openly communist or socialist organizations to so-called environmental organizations, the people who run multinational corporations who see profit signs if there are no borders or restraints, the mysterious clique who run some of nation's wealthiest foundations, and all the others who see themselves acquiring power and wealth under the aegis of the United Nations.
No single event occurring in the world during the second week of March 2002 has the importance of this United Nations conference. Unless its goals are utterly defeated, the rights of the citizens of the United States of America, as defined and protected by our Constitution, will disappear and, along with those of every other citizen of the world, we shall become the slaves of the UN.
Alan Caruba is the author of "The United Nations Vs. The United States", a pocket guide available exclusively from the website of The National Anxiety Center. His weekly commentary, "Warning Signs", is posted there as well.
Alan Caruba
Honestly can't see any way around those things. After perot got such huge numbers, mostly from actually getting some air time on the news shows and in the debates, they stopped that noise. No third party efforts get much comprehensive news coverage. both the dems and repubs have made it almost impossible to get into their "national debates', they created a catch 22, you need at least 15% support, but to get that 15% support you need air time. This is institutionalized smariness, it's disengenuous, and an insult to anyone who can actually think things through just a tad.
This nation is primarily TV viewers, followed by readers. The major networks get their fcc licenses rubber stamped, no matter how many complaints they have received over the years. The "two party system" does not appear in the constitution anywhere's, yet it's such a gimmee in people's minds it's acted on like it's an actual written "law". If you dare to step out of that box you are immediately labeled 'fringe" and either the dems or the repubs who "counted" you in their "ownership" tally tell you you are 'wasting" your vote, and the sheep's media follows this dictum, ie "no coverage" or mostly negative coverage..
Only solution I can see is IF a grassroots petiton and lobbying effort can be mounted to lobby the few remaining pro-US soverignty members in the house and senate, from both parties, to resign their affiliation with either of those parties and to openly join a common-cause third party or coalition effort. THAT would get some press, especially if there was at least a half a dozen or more who did such. I would say to combine the liberty caucus members on the repub side with an analysis on the dem side with regards to the bill of rights issues and voting records, concentrate on those few who pass muster, and see if this could be done, this amnesty -lite bil, gun ownership issues, the various UN distractions and usurpations, etc..
Trying to change all of them all at once is so close to impossible as to be a waste of time, but getting ENOUGH of them -even 6 to 12 say- to change to rock the political establishment MIGHT be doable. The press couldn't ignore it, look at the coverage when even one of them switches parties or goes independent. You might-scratch that, you'd have to even lobby current third party grassroots workers and the smidgen of elected people they have across the nation to join in for the greater good-agree to disagree on this or that issue, and unite behind just serious "change" in the status quo. The various third parties are slap fulla activists who are used to working effectively, but are at odds constantly with the various other parties. I would think a coaliton might actually accomplish more, and faster. These efforts might also entail lawsuits against the major networks in their political coverage, as it's completely do-able to count the minutes and instances of air coverage that a bare handful of elected repubs and dems get, as opposed to the vast bulk who get zip airtime. To me it's prima facie evidence of abuse of the fcc license. A serious hundred billion dollar class action lawsuit might be effective, could be joined in from almost anyone no matter their personal political agendas they support, and they would be hard pressed to deny the claims, as the videotapes exist. It just might scare them straight, as they would actually have to mount a defense of their obvious biases and lack of meaningful news coverage of people outside the top dozen or two that are CONSTANTLY on the various news shows. This bias is NOT serving the public's good, not-in-the-least. We actually DO have federal laws and regulations that concern these extremely lucrative fcc near-monopoly brodacast licenses, and they are mostly ignored. You could even include the fcc as a defendant in the lawsuit, as they have failed to do their jobs in this particular manner over the years.
The biggest thing stopping effective third party efforts is rigid adherence to exact detailed platforms, people find one negative they don't like, so they reject a third party, but fail to take note that even amongst the ardent supporterts of either the dems or the repubs that the same thing happens-there's some "things" they don't agree with-but they vote dem or repub anyway.
The third parties could retain their individual memberships, but unite in a new org as well, a coalition to change 'the system", they can do BOTH, to just break the stranglehold on the political process that the dems and repubs and the broadcast media have.
Coalition efforts are not perfect, as you can see in the parlimentary nations where this occurs, but at least there's more participation from across the board of their respective people's in general, and much less apathy; voting and interest levels are higher in nations with a variety of parties. There's less pressure on individual legislative acts to vote strict party lines. There's none of this nonsense we have in this nation about 'wasting" your vote. In these other nations, your vote is only wasted when it's not cast at all.
The largest untapped voting pool avaialable in the US right now is the one that has stopped voting, 50% of the electorate. That's a lotta votes, more than enough if even a fraction of those votes were cast to completely change election results all over. In numbers comparison, it dwarfs even all the recent immigrants if they were all to vote tomorrow, just by sheer size of numbers and the phenomenon of these numbers being widespread in almost every voting district/precinct across the nation.. A huge number of these non-voters would vote, they have just been so turned off by the "system" that they don't bother, as they have rightly identified 1/2 of the problem. That 1/2, is the important 1/2, is that it really hasn't made much of an over-all difference who controls the legislative or executive branches, because the basic over-all results are so similar that the point is moot. I've just heard this over and over again from people I know who have dropped out of the political process. They care about issues, but see such little practical difference in the choices that they don't bother, that and it might be impossible to lose the money from having to skip work to vote. I've heard that a lot, poll times are skewed for the 'system", not to get out all the vote effectively. this part *might* be possible to shame the entire congress into changing, as who could efferctively mount an intellectual exercise against it, and not suffer immediate condemantion as being a goon?
I will not deny that there are major differences in the two dominant parties, but I also won't deny the similarities are "more" than the differences. Untold millions probably agree with that assessment.
Another is the actual "vote", it needs to be a 24 hour period, and NOT on a work day in midweek. Perhaps even a 48 hour period encompassing the entire weekend to take into account various folks religious beliefs and duties thereof. That's a tough one top conquer, but if it was to change to that, you'd see a much higher voter turnout.
There's more but these are some starts.
You say the U.N. isn't our friend, we don't have friends, especially not most of our politicans, maybe not even our President, it will be interesting to see Bush's response at this meeting. Personally, I think it is all the man lives for, I would be very happy to be proven wrong about that. Remains to be seen.
Our message to the U.N.:
Defund, Denounce, Deport, Disarm, Disband!
3) A LARGE LOOPHOLE DECIMATES THE PROHIBITION OF A NATIONAL DATABASE BY ALLOWING INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS LIKE UNESCO (a mammoth division of the United Nations) AND THE ORGANIZATION FOR ECONOMIC COOPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT (OECD) (an international governance structure that works cooperatively with the United Nations) TO HAVE INDIVIDUALLY IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION ON YOUR CHILD. (See below for the types of sensitive information these global bureaucracies will have on children starting before birth).
Head, meet house.
It bears repeating until the masses awaken from their stupor!
I don't say this out of defense for Talbot, because I've followed his career. I do not like the guy at all. Instead, this is a damning statement directed at those who would decieve and betray.
Strobe Talbot, Alex Soros, Marc Mezvinsky and and Bill Clinton visited Frank the Hippy Pope today...
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.