Erollisi Marr - The Nameless

Go Back   Erollisi Marr - The Nameless > NON EQ Stuff (Real life, other games, etc.) > Steam Vent


Reply
 
Add/Share Add/Share Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-28-2008, 05:14 AM   #1
Drysdale
RSS Feed
 
Drysdale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 20,628
Default This Chucklehead may actually get me to vote for McCain!

Yeah... not liking this one little bit...

http://www.enterstageright.com/archi...08unbarack.htm
Barack Obama and the UN's drive for global governance

By Tom DeWeese
web posted July 21, 2008

Senator Barack Obama has introduced a dangerous bill and it's on the fast track to Senate passage, probably because of his high profile position as the expected Democrat presidential nominee. Obama hasn't done much legislatively in his freshman Senate term, but this one is very telling about what we can expect from a President Obama.

The bill is the "Global Poverty Act" (S.2433) and is not just a compassionate bit of fluff that Obama dreamed up to help the poor of the world. This bill is directly tied to the United Nations and serves as little more than a shakedown of American taxpayers in a massive wealth redistribution scheme. In fact, if passed, The Global Poverty Act will provide the United Nations with 0.7% of the United States gross national product. Estimates are that it will add up to at least $845 billion of taxpayer money for welfare to third world countries, in addition to the $300 billion Americans spent for the same thing in 2006.

The situation is urgent because the Global Poverty Act has already passed the House of Representatives by a unanimous voice vote on September 25, 2007. The senate version has been passed out of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee by unanimous consent and ready for a full Senate vote.

Of course the United States has had an ongoing program of supplying foreign aid and assistance to the poor for decades. And the U.S. pays most of the bills at the UN for its herd of programs. So what's new about Obama's bill, and why is it dangerous?

Some history that led up to the Global Poverty Act. In 1999 and 2000 non-governmental organizations, NGOs held numerous meetings around the world to write what became known as the Charter for Global Democracy. The document was prepared to be a blueprint for achieving global governance. In reality it was a charter for the abolition of individual freedom, national sovereignty and limited government.

The Charter for Global Democracy outlined its goals in 12 detailed "principles":
Principle One called for the consolidation of all international agencies under the direct authority of the UN.

Principle Two called for UN regulation of all transnational corporations and financial institutions, requiring an "international code of conduct" concerning the environment and labor standards.

Principle Three explored various schemes to create independent revenue sources for the UN - meaning UN taxes including fees on all international monetary transactions, taxes on aircraft flights in the skies, and on shipping fuels, and licensing of what the UN called the "global commons," meaning use of air, water and natural resources. The Law of the Sea Treaty fits this category.

Principle Four would restructure the UN by eliminating the veto power and permanent member status on the Security Council. Such a move would almost completely eliminate U.S. influence and power in the world body. In turn Principle Four called for the creation of an "Assembly of the People" which would be populated by hand-picked non-governmental organizations (NGOs) which are nothing more than political groups with their own agendas (the UN calls NGOs "civil society"). Now, the UN says these NGO's will be the representatives of the "people" and the Assembly of the People will become the new power of the UN.

Principle Five would authorize a standing UN army.

Principle Six would require UN registration of all arms and the reduction of all national armies "as part of a multinational global security system" under the authority of the UN.

Principle Seven would require individual and national compliance with all UN "Human rights" treaties and declarations.

Principle Eight would activate the UN Criminal Court and make it compulsory for all nations - now achieved.

Principle Nine called for a new institution to establish economic and environmental security by ensuring "Sustainable Development."

Principle Ten would establish an International Environmental Court

Principle Eleven demanded an international declaration stating that climate change is an essential global security interest that requires the creation of a "high level action team" to allocate carbon emissions based on equal per-capita rights - The Kyoto Global Warming Treaty in action.

Principle Twelve demanded the cancellation of all debt owed by the poorest nations, global poverty reductions and for the "equitable sharing" of global resources, as allocated by the UN - here is where Obama's Global Poverty Act comes in.

Specifically, the Charter for Global Democracy was intended to give the UN domain over all of the earth's land, air and seas. In addition it would give the UN the power to control all natural resources, wild life, and energy sources, even radio waves. Such control would allow the UN to place taxes on everything from development; to fishing; to air travel; to shipping. Anything that could be defined as using the earth€™s resources would be subject to UN use-taxes. Coincidentally, all twelve principles came directly from the UN's Commission on Global Governance.

There was one major problem with the Charter for Global Democracy, at least as far as the UN was concerned. It was too honest and straightforward. Overt action displeases the high-order thinking skills of UN diplomats. The UN likes to keep things fuzzy and gray so as not to scare off the natives. That way there is less chance of screaming headlines of a pending takeover by the UN. So, by the time the UN's Millennium Summit rolled around in September 2000, things weren't quite so clear.

At the Summit, attended by literally every head of state and world leader, including then-president Bill Clinton, the name of the Charter had been changed to the Millennium Declaration and the language had been toned down to sound more like suggestions and ideas. Then those "suggestions" were put together in the "Millennium Declaration" in the name of all of the heads of state. No vote or debate was allowed - just acclamation by world leaders who basically said nothing. And the deed was done. The UN had its marching orders for the new Millennium.

Now the principles were called "Millennium Goals," and there were eight instead of twelve. Goal 1: Eradicate Extreme Hunger and Poverty; Goal 2: Achieve Universal Primary Education; Goal 3: Promote Gender Equality and Empowerment of Women; Goal 4: Reduce Child Mortality; Goal 5: Improve Maternal Health; Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, Malaria and other diseases; Goal 7: Ensure Environmental Sustainability; Goal 8: Develop a Global Partnership for Development.

Yes, these are sneaky guys, well trained in the art of saying nothing. Who could opposes such noble goals? The Millennium Project, which was set up to achieve the "goals" says on its website that it intends to "end poverty by 2015." A noble goal, indeed. So what happened to the 12 Charter principles? Take a hard look - they are all still there.

Principles One, Two, and Twelve are right there in Goal 8 - to develop a global partnership for development. Now almost every world organization such as the World Bank carries a section on their web sites calling for "Millennium Development Goals" which control international banking and loan policy. They set policy goals for each country and sometimes communities to measure if nations are keeping their promise to implement the Millennium goals.

Principle Seven is clearly Goal 3, the only way to assure Gender Equality is to enforce compliance with UN Human Rights treaties. Principle Eight has already been achieved. Principle Nine is Goal 7. Al Gore is doing his best to enforce Principle Eleven. Global Warming, no matter how well the theory is debunked, just won't go away because it is one of the Millennium Goals.

And then there is Barack Obama's Global Poverty Act. Can you see which Principle that is? Of course, Principle 12 and Goal 1. Obama's bill specifically mentions the Millennium Goals as its guide and the 0.7% of GNP is right out of UN documents. In order to eradicate poverty by 2015, they say, every industrial nation must pony up 0.7% of their GNP to the UN for use in eradicating poverty.

The UN is now becoming an international collection agency, pressing to collect the promises the world leaders made at the Millennium Summit. The UN wants the cash. In 2005 former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan said, "Developed countries that have not already done so should establish timetables to achieve the 0.7% target of gross national income for official development assistance by no later than 2015..."

At the Summit in 2000, the UN set clear goals to establish its power over sovereign nations and to enforce the greatest redistribution of wealth scheme ever perpetrated on the world. Now it has the Criminal Court; Sustainable Development is fast becoming official policy in every corner of the nation - only today we call it "going green;" and there is a full court press on to enforce Global Warming policy, in spite of the fact that there is now much evidence surfacing to debunk the theory.

Clearly, Obama's bill has been introduced to assure the United States falls in line with the Millennium Declaration and all that it stands for. After all, the UN needs the money to pay for its new found power. Truth, science and American taxpayer interests be hanged. Barack Obama wants to be a "world" leader.
Screw anyone who favors globalism... Seriously.
__________________
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."
-Robert A. Heinlein

"Thou shalt not steal. Except by majority vote." - Gary North
Drysdale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2008, 05:59 AM   #2
Hormadrune
Sociopathic bully?
 
Hormadrune's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: PA
Posts: 11,895
Truly global governance would actually make my job easier. Firstly, because standardized finance and accounting regulations would streamline a lot of the garbage work I dislike doing and secondly, because my job would be gone when the pharma industry was gutted by global healthcare regulation.

Before your panties disappear too far up your rear though, let's observe that the bill in question was unanimously passed through the House according to your blog here.

That said, I think we give more than enough foreign aid already. I'd rather see taxes reduced by the amount in question if we're so "able" to funnel US tax revenues off to the third world. International philanthropy should be done at the individual level IMO.
__________________
WoW-Ghostlands-US: Prae | sp | Prolonix | Horm | Ulfhednar | l
EQ: Hormadrune <Retired> <OFS> <CoI> <Affy> <CE>
Hormadrune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2008, 06:25 AM   #3
Drysdale
RSS Feed
 
Drysdale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 20,628
Yeah, not liking Congress at all atm...

I would hate globalism. That just means a bunch of countries with dictators would get to tell us how we should be running things. NOT a good idea.
__________________
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."
-Robert A. Heinlein

"Thou shalt not steal. Except by majority vote." - Gary North
Drysdale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2008, 06:32 AM   #4
Pafuna
Brilliant Curmudgeon
 
Pafuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: In the Pocket of Big Oil
Posts: 2,063
Y'know, I remember these very same concerns in the '80s, when extremist militia groups were ranting on about this very same stuff. Great tidbits like:

- The UN is empowered to usurp U.S. sovereignty and invade us at a given signal

- Black UN helicopters were ready to swarm our towns and cities in the event of an uprising

- NATO troops were ready to invade from Mexico and Canada and invasion routes were marked by holographic images on the backs of street signs


I see this stuff now and laugh my ass off, first and foremost because there are several glaring facts that counter all of this -

- The US provides fully half of the UN's annual operating budget, making us essentially the majority shareholder in the 'New World Order'. Congress has long been clamoring for cutting off funding of the UN, which the Executive Branch has been loathe to do since being in the cabal that is the UN gives us MUCH greater leverage since we plough so much money into it.

Moreover, the US is the leader in providing foreign aid to the world, period. The world knows this and while sometimes yakking against the evil US, ultimately, at the end of the day, foreign governments down on their luck come to the US with their hands out. Whatever redistribution of wealth conspiracy schemes the loonitarians are screaming about already happen every time the US cuts a check to some third-world jerkwater looking for a few million bucks to buy 'food for its citizens' (translation: arms and ammo for the next coup).

The lesson? Money talks.

- The UN operates under a charter, meaning an agreement between partners. The US, along with eight other powers, is a senior partner, ergo that whatever sly gimmicks other nations attempt will ultimately come before the senior partners, who have the resources, capital, and muscle to dismiss such ridiculous initiatives. In short, the US is the most equal among equals.

Does anyone really think that the majority of nations in the UN have anywhere near the resources to force any of the five members of the Security Council to do anything? Shit, the world can't get a third-rate country in the middle of Africa to stop killing its own citizens, thank you very much, what makes anyone think that the US will fork over its capital just because some rinky-dink UN resolution makes it happen?

The lesson? Bullshit walks.

- Finally, I point out that such a clever scheme takes precision planning, leverage, and teamwork, not to mention a wealth of resources. The UN couldn't leave a burning building together.

What's more, this new-found UN 'power' requires the muscle to back it up. When, if ever, has any UN-mandated peacekeeping force been able to fend off all but the most timid rock-throwing teenagers? Are you seriously telling me that the combined combat power of the UN is so vaunted that 400 peacekeepers in Bosnia had to be rescued from Serbian forces? Seriously?

Fuck, if you can't handle the Serbs, don't even bother coming here, 'cause places like Compton and Bed-Stuy are better armed than most third-world nations.

The lesson? Paper tigers tend to burn quickly in the harsh heat of political reality.



Thus endeth the lesson.
__________________
Originally Posted by Ini View Post
Holy shit I think Pafuna just won the intraweb!
Originally Posted by FafnerMorell View Post
Damn, is Pafuna allowed to win the intrawebs twice, or is it a lifetime achievement thing?
Pafuna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2008, 06:50 AM   #5
Drysdale
RSS Feed
 
Drysdale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 20,628
How's it a paper tiger when the person introducing the bill to give over sovereignity to the UN has a legtimate shot at the presidency?

We may be the money, but we certainly aren't calling the shots in the UN.
__________________
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."
-Robert A. Heinlein

"Thou shalt not steal. Except by majority vote." - Gary North
Drysdale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2008, 08:25 AM   #6
Pafuna
Brilliant Curmudgeon
 
Pafuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: In the Pocket of Big Oil
Posts: 2,063
Originally Posted by Drysdale View Post
How's it a paper tiger when the person introducing the bill to give over sovereignity to the UN has a legtimate shot at the presidency?

We may be the money, but we certainly aren't calling the shots in the UN.
For the very reason cited in your article reference -

NGOs held numerous meetings around the world to write what became known as the Charter for Global Democracy. The document was prepared to be a blueprint for achieving global governance. (emphasis mine)
NGOs are non-governmental organizations and best defined (in my humble opinion) in Wiki -
Originally Posted by teh Wiki
A non-governmental organization (NGO) is a legally constituted organization created by private persons or organizations with no participation or representation of any government. In the cases in which NGOs are funded totally or partially by governments, the NGO maintains its non-governmental status insofar as it excludes government representatives from membership in the organization.
An NGO could be UNICEF, Doctors Without Borders, or the Red Cross. As cited, they hold no power, are forbidden to hold power, and are forbidden to even have government representation.

Your article cites these NGOs as crafting the Charter for Global Democracy, but in terms of reality, they are private citizens and organizations with no legal standing in the UN. They don't vote, they don't hold power, they don't even get invitations to the meetings, precisely because they are barred from government representation. It's akin to having a group of people picketing outside the Capitol who outline a charter, but have no representative powers to enact such a charter.

So, that means that the Charter for Global Democracy has no teeth even in the traditionally toothless world of UN charters. The Charter is nothing more than a collective opinion, and we all know how much those are worth in the global arena.

The point here, Drys, is that the rubber meets the road when sovereign nations create such charters with other sovereign nations, not when a body of people who cannot legally represent any one stipulates an opinion. The political reality is that the five members of the UNSECO have permanent veto power because they have the clout, not the pie in the sky NGOs who form a 'charter' with no representation whatsoever.

It's like worrying about two guys in Juarez who opine that the U.S. must cede Texas to Mexico - well, you can have all the opinions you want, but when push comes to shove, I'd bet my next paycheck that Texas would have something to say about that.
__________________
Originally Posted by Ini View Post
Holy shit I think Pafuna just won the intraweb!
Originally Posted by FafnerMorell View Post
Damn, is Pafuna allowed to win the intrawebs twice, or is it a lifetime achievement thing?
Pafuna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2008, 11:58 AM   #7
SupportTank
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Ottawa. AKA, SUCK CENTRAL!
Posts: 3,344
while it maybe tinfoil

I see this as a stepping stone for the usa to step in when ever it wants on whoever it wants. with un backing citing.

sorry we are just following the un on this.

and since the usa fund the un. the un generaly does what the usa wants when it matters.

sounds to me like a legalized version of do what ever the fuck we want without the un screaming card.
__________________
Everyone has The Right to MY opinion!
Everyone also has the right to be Stupid every now and then. Some people Don't know how Not to abuse that!

70 Warrior - Affliction

If someone tells you it's OK to lie. How do you know they aren't lying?
SupportTank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2008, 12:12 PM   #8
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
I'll take this over the unilateral approach of W.
In fact, Daddy was the one pushing "New World Order" which was in alliance with this idea as well as a continuation of all the foreign policy which preceded him.
__________________
YES WE DID!!! AGAIN!!!
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2008, 04:58 PM   #9
AjTaliesen
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,516
Originally Posted by Pafuna View Post
Fuck, if you can't handle the Serbs, don't even bother coming here, 'cause places like Compton and Bed-Stuy are better armed than most third-world nations..
Rest of the post was good. This point...no.

Serbs...fighting pretty much for about...2000 years...remember that spot on the risk board between Europe and Asia that no one ever held for even one turn? They live there.

Designer "Gangsta" shoes and a sense of injured entitlement dont quite compete, nor does "pooky got shot!" quite stand up to "I went out for a smoke and when I came back everyone was dead...I don't know who the govoernment is anymore." (that one was true...told to me by a survivor who was lucky enough to make it here and discover that Southeast DC was like a paradise...if someone shot you police actually came!)
AjTaliesen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2008, 04:55 AM   #10
Pafuna
Brilliant Curmudgeon
 
Pafuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: In the Pocket of Big Oil
Posts: 2,063
Originally Posted by AjTaliesen View Post
Rest of the post was good. This point...no.

Serbs...fighting pretty much for about...2000 years...remember that spot on the risk board between Europe and Asia that no one ever held for even one turn? They live there.

Designer "Gangsta" shoes and a sense of injured entitlement dont quite compete, nor does "pooky got shot!" quite stand up to "I went out for a smoke and when I came back everyone was dead...I don't know who the govoernment is anymore." (that one was true...told to me by a survivor who was lucky enough to make it here and discover that Southeast DC was like a paradise...if someone shot you police actually came!)
It was intended to be a farcical reference; maybe I should have used Texas instead.
__________________
Originally Posted by Ini View Post
Holy shit I think Pafuna just won the intraweb!
Originally Posted by FafnerMorell View Post
Damn, is Pafuna allowed to win the intrawebs twice, or is it a lifetime achievement thing?
Pafuna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2008, 08:32 AM   #11
Wildane
Psychopath w/a conscience
 
Wildane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Hospitality State, asshole!
Posts: 10,540
Why the hell don't we take this money and funnel it to nations we already fucking owe?
__________________
"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." - Umberto Eco

"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear." - Thomas Jefferson
Wildane is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:44 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.