John R. Houk
© September 26, 2012
The United Nations keeps on finding deceptive ways to enlist the United States of America into a sovereignty ending compact with the United Nations. If the UN is able to trump a national government’s sovereignty that essentially makes the UN a global governing body making the rule of law on a global basis.
In America’s case the existence of a global rule of law authority would nullify the U.S. Constitution eradicating the best Liberty-Rights the world has ever seen basically making the Bill of Rights portion of Constitution subservient to United Nations legal precedent.
Free Speech would be reduced hindering minority beliefs.
Religious Freedom would be regulated to meet varying standards; e.g. Biblical Christians could not have the same public worship say a Muslim may have (Church bells no – Islamic adhan by muezzin yes); Biblical Christians would be jailed preaching against homosexuality, Biblical Christians could be jailed for preaching (Christ’s Great Commission) for atheists and non-Christians might be offended and incited to violence and so on and so on.
The Second Amendment for American individuals to bear arms for protection would controlled or ended by the UN because armed citizens is always a threat to government authority and essentially the UN would be the World Government.
Undoubtedly there are other Constitutional Rights that would be curtailed or terminated by UN authority.
The most notorious path the UN has been implementing Agenda 21 which is using ecological-Global Warming-Agriculture-Depopulation as the path to operate a top to bottom global government.
Here is a brief description of Agenda 21:
Awareness of Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development is racing across the nation as citizens in community after community are learning what their city planners are actually up to. As awareness grows, I am receiving more and more calls for tools to help activists fight back. Many complain that elected officials just won’t read detailed reports or watch long videos. “Can you give us something that is quick, and easy to read that we can hand out,” I’m asked.
So here it is. A one page, quick description of Agenda 21 that fits on one page. I’ve also included for the back side of your hand out a list of quotes for the perpetrators of Agenda 21 that should back up my brief descriptions.
A word of caution, use this as a started (sic) kit, but do not allow it to be your only knowledge of this very complex subject. To kill it you have to know the facts. Research, know your details; discover the NGO players in your community; identify who is victimized by the policies and recruit them to your fight; and then kill Agenda 21. That’s how it must be done. The information below is only your first step. Happy hunting.
What is Sustainable Development?
According to its authors, the objective of sustainable development is to integrate economic, social and environmental policies in order to achieve reduced consumption, social equity, and the preservation and restoration of biodiversity. Sustainablists insist that every societal decision be based on environmental impact, focusing on three components; global land use, global education, and global population control and reduction.
Social Equity (Social Justice)
Social justice is described as the right and opportunity of all people “to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment.” Redistribution of wealth. Private property is a social injustice since not everyone can build wealth from it. National sovereignty is a social injustice. Universal health care is a social justice. All part of Agenda 21 policy.
Public Private Partnerships (PPP). Special dealings between government and certain, chosen corporations which get tax breaks, grants and the government’s power of Eminent Domain to implement sustainable policy. Government-sanctioned monopolies.
Local Sustainable Development policies
Smart Growth, Wildlands Project, Resilient Cities, Regional Visioning Projects, STAR Sustainable Communities, Green jobs, Green Building Codes, “Going Green,” Alternative Energy, Local Visioning, facilitators, regional planning, historic preservation, conservation easements, development rights, sustainable farming, comprehensive planning, growth management, consensus.
Who is behind it?
ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability (formally, International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives). Communities pay ICLEI dues to provide “local” community plans, software, training, etc. Addition groups include American Planning Council, The Renaissance Planning Group, International City/ County Management Group, aided by US Mayors Conference, National Governors Association, National League of Cities, National Association of County Administrators and many more private organizations and official government agencies. Foundation and government grants drive the process.
Where did it originate?
The term Sustainable Development was first introduced to the world in the pages a 1987 report (Our Common Future) produced by the United Nations World Commission on Environmental and Development, authored by Gro Harlem Brundtland, VP of the World Socialist Party. The term was first offered as official UN policy in 1992, in a document called UN Sustainable Development Agenda 21, issued at the UN’s Earth Summit, today referred to simply as Agenda 21.
What gives Agenda 21 Ruling Authority?
More than 178 nations adopted Agenda 21 as official policy during a signing ceremony at the Earth Summit. US president George H.W. Bush signed the document for the US. In signing, each nation pledge to adopt the goals of Agenda 21. In 1995, President Bill Clinton, in compliance with Agenda 21, signed Executive Order #12858 to create the President’s Council on Sustainable Development in order to “harmonize” US environmental policy with UN directives as outlined in Agenda 21. The EO directed all agencies of the Federal Government to work with state and local community governments in a joint effort “reinvent” government using the guidelines outlined in Agenda 21. As a result, with the assistance of groups like ICLEI, Sustainable Development is now emerging as government policy in every town, county and state in the nation. (READ THE REST - Agenda 21 In One Easy Lesson; Worldview Times; 04/04/11)
Now that I have the stage with Agenda 21 become aware of the next UN scheme to terminate American Sovereignty. That scheme is called the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) [SA Phyllis Schlafly]. This is a United Nations sponsored international treaty that has a name that evokes the emotion of sympathy. I mean who doesn’t help Disabled People? Who wants to be labeled a wicked miser for refusing compassion for the Disabled?
The thing is there are loads wording that would nullify the United States Constitution.
GOP Senators Pushing Constitution Subverting UN Treaty
By Floyd Brown
Sent: 9/25/2012 10:04 AM
Sent by WCJ
What Would You Say If We Told You That The United States Senate Is About To Ratify A U.N. Treaty That Seeks To • Eradicate Your Parental Rights • Advance Abortion Around The World • Sexualize Children As Young As Five-Years Old • And Institute Population-Control Measures At Home And Abroad?
And what would you say if we told you that a number of Senate Republicans have joined hands with the Democrats and are actually pushing the ratification of this United Nations treaty, either because they are legitimately ignorant when it comes to the actual language of this treaty, or are simply too scared to oppose it because it is masquerading as an international effort to affirm the rights of disabled persons?
We couldn’t have made it up if we tried. As a matter of fact, Senator Jim DeMint, who is leading the charge in opposition to this United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) treaty, came right out and said: “When you look at the language in the treaty you realize THERE ARE OTHER THINGS AT STAKE HERE. A LOT OF THE LANGUAGE IN THERE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH DISABILITIES....” [Emphasis Ours]
And now, CRPD actually stands a better-than-even chance of actually being ratified because RINO Senators Richard Lugar, John Barrasso and Johnny Isakson, voted with the Democratic majority in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to send it to the full Senate for ratification… and we’re not about to let our elected officials pass this unholy thing in the dark of night while no one is looking.
You can stop CRPD the exact same way you just sunk the United Nations Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) and the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (ATT). We need to get our elected officials on record NOW. It only takes 34 Senators to say “No” and if 34 of them put their opposition to CRPD IN WRITING, right here and right now, as they did with LOST and ATT, we can kill CRPD, dead in its tracks, without even bringing it up for a vote.
Use the button or the hyperlink below to send your urgent Blast Faxes to each and every one of the 47 Republican Members of the United States Senate.
The Problem With The CRPD Is That It’s Not Really About Helping Persons With Disabilities. In Actuality, It’s A Ploy To Trick Us Into Voluntarily Surrendering Our Sovereignty.
Make no mistake, the canard of addressing the needs of the disabled is simply pretty ribbons and bows. What’s inside the actual package is the surrender of our sovereignty to the America-haters and tyrannical third-world dictatorships that call themselves United Nations Members.
And we’re not the only ones saying it. The Heritage Foundation writes that “ratifying it [the CRPD] would subject the U.S. to UNTOLD THREATS against its sovereignty and invite further intrusion by U.N. officials into sensitive social and domestic policies.” [Emphasis Ours]
Heritage goes on to say: “However, U.S. ratification of the [CRPD] is more than merely superfluous; the [CRPD] threatens American sovereignty in a variety of ways. As with other human rights treaties, the [CRPD] established a treaty body composed of unelected ‘experts’ … that evaluates the compliance of state parties to the treaty.”
Those are mighty strong words coming from an organization like Heritage that strives to phrase just about everything in as dignified and academic a manner as humanly possible. There can be no mistake, CRPD is all about the surrender of our national sovereignty… and we’re in no mood to surrender it… we’re not going to stand by a let it happen without a fight.
Senator Jim DeMint said: “We don’t need to go beyond our Constitution and federalist system by allowing our fundamental rights to be dictated by unaccountable and unelected international bureaucrats.”
John Bolton, the former-Ambassador to the United Nations, was making an obvious reference to the CRPD as the hat-trick to LOST and ATT when he recently said: “I think there are a lot of threats to American sovereignty that the Obama administration has had cooking in the U.N. They’ve kept it kind of low key.”
And Bonnie Alba, an independent columnist, who served in various positions in the Department of Defense, said of the United Nations: “[I]f we acquiesce to the U.N. plan to run the world under the guise of helping the poor and weak, there is one guarantee. Over time all nations would lose their national sovereignty to the U.N. which would end up performing as a Banana Republic Dictatorship through enforced collection of taxes. And accountable to no one.”
And what is perhaps the ultimate irony is that this treaty, if ratified, would probably do nothing to safeguard the innate, inalienable (and for those of us in the United States, God-given) rights of people with disabilities. Instead, it WOULD erode (or even eradicate) the civil liberties of your children and grandchildren; and that’s why we must speak out and make our voice heard at this very moment.
Use the button or the hyperlink below to send your urgent Blast Faxes to each and every one of the 47 Republican Members of the United States Senate.
But The Eradication Of Our Sovereignty Is Not The End Game. It’s Just The Beginning.
Mike Farris with the Home School Legal Defense Fund clues us in to the first bit of United Nations trickery on CRPD when he tells us that the “CRPD provides no specific definition of disability.” And Farris is not alone. Heritage concurs: “Other language in [the CRPD] is troubling… such as its lack of a clear definition of disability, which it defines as ‘an evolving concept.’” Of course, neglecting to clearly define the term “DISABILITY” in the 50 distinct articles of the “Convention on the Rights of Persons with DISABILITIES” treaty WAS NO ACCIDENT. It’s Standard United Nations Operating Procedure.
An unelected and unaccountable body of America-haters and third-world thugs, or as Heritage put it, “a treaty body composed of unelected ‘experts,’” will define this “evolving concept” as they go. The definitions of what constitutes “disabilities” and “rights” will constantly change, expand and morph to include greater numbers of people, and as more “rights” are allocated to an ever-increasing numbers of people who are deemed “disabled,” others will demand these newly created special “rights” as well.
And our enemies will simply rinse-and-repeat the process, continually abuse this “evolving concept” and impose unfunded, unconstitutional and even sublimely ridiculous mandates upon you, your children and your grandchildren, under the guise of “securing the rights of the disabled.” In reality, they’ll simply be attempting to overwhelm our already strained entitlement system, and crippling the United States under the weight of that same entitlement system.
If you think that ObamaCare and Barack Obama’s other economy crippling shenanigans are bad, know that the demagogues of the third-world are just itching to show us how it’s really done… but we’re not going to give them the chance.
We can’t give them the chance because we might not be able to close Pandora’s Box once it is flung open; and once our own cowardly politicians start to tell us that we are obliged to follow the DICTATES of this body of third-world thugs and America-haters (and tyrannically enforce OUR compliance on THEIR behalf), it’s all over.
Article VI of our own Constitution requires compliance: “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”
As for our enemies, they won’t comply; and all the America-haters at the United Nations will simply turn their backs and look at us with blank stares on their faces. ‘What do you mean Iran is not complying with the provisions of the treaty… of course they’re in compliance… however, the other member nations of the panel would like to address some more issues involving your compliance with you.’
After all, THEY define the terms and THEY make the rules as they go. As with many United Nations treaties and resolutions, CRPD will mean whatever they say it means on any given day, and our children and grandchildren will be left with no national sovereignty… no individual liberties… and a wreaked economy. Our children and grandchildren will be reduced to serfdom under the iron fist and the autocratic rule of those who despise freedom, liberty, and most of all, us… but it doesn’t have to be that way. We can put a stop this menace today.
Use the button or the hyperlink below to send your urgent Blast Faxes to each and every one of the 47 Republican Members of the United States Senate.
Did You Know That The Promotion Of The Radical Worldwide Abortion Movement Goes Hand In Hand With Safeguarding The Rights Of Persons With Disabilities?
And just what do abortion and the rights of the disabled have to do with each other? We still don’t know, but we DO KNOW that the United Nations has become infamous over the years, for constantly sneaking coded abortion advocacy language into treaties and resolutions that should have nothing whatsoever to do with abortion; and CRPD is no exception.
Article 25 of the CRPD which addresses issues of “Health” states that the “State Parties” are mandated to “take all appropriate measures” to ensure those covered under the treaty have access to “gender-sensitive” health services… and “free or affordable health care and programmes… in the area of sexual and reproductive health…” (“sexual and reproductive health,” is known to be United Nations-speak for abortion).
And just so you know not only how committed the Left is when it comes to promoting a radical worldwide abortion agenda, but also how the United Nations intentionally interjects “code phrases” in treaties and resolutions; consider what happened when Senator Marco Rubio actually introduced an amendment to the CRPD in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee which simple stated:
“The United States understands that the phrase ‘sexual and reproductive health’ in Article 25(a) of the Convention does not include abortion, and its use in that article does not create any abortion rights, cannot be interpreted to constitute support, endorsement, or promotion of abortion, and in no way suggests that abortion be promoted as a method of family planning.”
ALL HELL BROKE LOOSE. Chloe Cooney with the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) wrote: “These extreme views in opposition to women’s rights and U.S. participation in the global community only succeed in marginalizing a bipartisan effort like the [CRPD],” and Senator Barbara Boxer echoed that statement: “No senator in my view should use any international treaty to push his or her views on an issue that isn’t part of this treaty.”
Did you catch that? The United Nations is advancing a treaty that allegedly attempts to safeguard the innate and inalienable rights of persons with disabilities and interjects the promotion of abortion into the document THROUGH THE USE OF CODE WORDS; and when a Marco Rubio sought to clarify that the treaty on the rights of the disabled “in no way suggests that abortion be promoted as a method of family planning,” Barbara Boxer and her denizens of the Left accused RUBIO of interjecting HIS “views on an issue” into the debate.
And the Democrats and the RINOs on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted Rubio down. That’s why we need 34 Senators to go on record NOW and put their opposition to CRPD in writing. We need to send the world a message. The United States refuses to even hold a vote on lunacy.
And Did You Know That Our Children Have The “Right” To Sexual Gratification From The Moment They Emerge From The Womb And This Disability Treaty Is Going To Enforce That “Right” Too?
Senator DeMint and Mike Farris have very real and well-founded concerns when it comes to Article 7 of the CRPD, which mandates that states ensure that “the best interests of the child” shall be the primary consideration in all actions concerning the “rights” of the child.
As Farris, who sees the dangers in his capacity as one of the nation’s leading, if not the nation’s leading, homeschool advocate states: “Should the government’s assessment of the child’s best interests differ from that of the parents, the government gets to make the decision, not the parents.”
DeMint says: “We’re afraid that if the language suggests that parental authority is not absolute, we’re going to have an international body telling our parents they can’t homeschool.”
What DeMint and Farris aren’t addressing is that the dangers posed by this treaty to your children and grandchildren are far worse. Article 23 of the CRPD, deceptively and ironically titled, “Respect For Home And The Family” mandates that children have “access to age-appropriate information, reproductive and family planning education are recognized, and the means necessary to enable them to exercise these rights are provided.”
You might be interested in knowing what the United Nations typically means when it uses the term “age-appropriate” in reference to “reproductive and family planning education,” because it doesn’t mean what you think it means… at least not to far too many United Nations officials and NGOs.
As an aside, you may have also realized that the term “rights” is also a United Nations code word that typically means “coerced mandate;” a scary proposition when the word is used in relation to the topics of “abortion,” “health care,” “the disabled,” and “child gratification.”
One of the good-guys, Family Watch International, a NGO that attempts to prevent some of the more radical anti-family notions that come out of the United Nations from ever seeing the light of day, tells us about the term “age-appropriate:”
“The International Guidelines on Sexuality Education,” which is a “publication issued by UNESCO, UNICEF and the United Nations Population Fund “maintains that children have a right to receive instruction in sexual pleasure, masturbation and homosexuality…”
Volumes have been written on this subject. Unfortunately, the vast majority of people have never read anything issued by the United Nations and United Nations’ recognized NGOs; and if you are so ignorant as to believe that the sexualization of your child is not “age-appropriate”… well that’s just too bad.
Under the terms of the treaty, the United States Government will be mandated to enforce the dissemination of “age-appropriate information” and “reproductive and family planning education” to your child, whether you, as the parent, like it or not. It’s your child’s “right.”
As Senator Boxer would probably say, you really should not “use any international treaty to push” your personal “views on an issue that isn’t part of this treaty.” We say “nuts” to that… our God-given liberties are non-negotiable and it’s essential that we communicate that message to our elected officials.
And Did You Further Know That Population-Control And The Rights Of The Disabled Go Hand In Hand Too?
Article 25 of the CRPD, which has already been quoted in part, also mandates that “State Parties” provide access to “population-based public health programmes…” And just what is a “population-based public health” program?
One example that may actually be familiar to you is something called “Agenda 21,” a term which should conjure visions of former Vice-President Al Gore’s “Earth In The Balance”-enviro-babble; but a good, hard, look at Barack Obama’s Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, John P. Holdren, should more accurately solidify what is meant by “population-based public health programmes” in your mind.
As it turns out, Van Jones wasn’t the only “nut” in Obama’s inner-circle, and what is probably even more startling is that the United States Senate actually confirmed Holdren.
In 1997, Holdren co-authored a textbook entitled “Ecoscience,” which advocated mass sterilization, compulsory abortion, one-world government and the establishment of a global police force to enforce these population control measures… errrr… “rights.”
Here are several more of the “greatest hits” from Holdren’s tome:
“Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution [he's talking about the United States Constitution] if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society.” -page 837
“If this could be accomplished, security might be provided by an armed international organization, a global analogue of a police force. Many people have recognized this as a goal, but the way to reach it remains obscure in a world where factionalism seems, if anything, to be increasing. The first step necessarily involves partial surrender of sovereignty to an international organization.” -page 917
“… a comprehensive Planetary Regime could control the development, administration, conservation, and distribution of all natural resources, renewable or nonrenewable… the Regime could have the power to control pollution not only in the atmosphere and oceans, but also in such freshwater bodies as rivers and lakes that cross international boundaries or that discharge into the oceans. The Regime might also be a logical central agency for regulating all international trade… including all food on the international market.” -pages 942 and 943
“The Planetary Regime might be given responsibility for determining the optimum population for the world and for each region and for arbitrating various countries’ shares within their regional limits. Control of population size might remain the responsibility of each government, but the Regime would have some power to enforce the agreed limits.” -pages 942 and 943
Why Would So Many Republican Senators So Willingly Support The Surrender Of Our Sovereignty To The United Nations?
We’ve got our work cut out for us because Senators Lugar, Barrasso and Isakson aren’t the only Senate Republicans supporting this atrocity. Senators John McCain, Jerry Moran and Bob Corker have already gone on record in support of the CRPD as well… and more are certain to follow if our elected officials don’t hear from you right now.
These 6 RINOs only need 8 more Senate Republicans to agree to this affront to our sovereignty, and there are plenty that are ripe for the picking… Senators Lindsey Graham, Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, Scott Brown, Kay Bailey-Huchinson, Lamar Alexander, Mark Kirk, Thad Cochran, Michael Enzi, John Thune and Lisa Murkowski come immediately to mind.
That’s more than 8 and that list is by no means inclusive. Senators Moran and Barrasso, who stood in opposition to LOST, are actually pushing CRPD. McClatchy even reported that Jim DeMint is very aware that he’s “up against other Republican senators” and that he “faces an uphill battle in preventing ratification.”
Why would these Republican Senators so willingly surrender our sovereignty to the United Nations? Why ask why? History, after all, is clear. In the “Federalist Papers” Alexander Hamilton observed that “a dangerous ambition more often lurks behind the specious mask of zeal for the rights of the people” and “that of those men who have overturned the liberties of republics, the greatest number have begun their career by paying obsequious court to the people….”
Perhaps it is enough to say that it takes intelligence, discernment and courage to do the right thing; particularly when the “right thing” is opposing something that masquerades as an effort to advance the rights of the disabled.
Isakson’s own office inadvertently confirmed the above by issuing a slyly-worded statement that said he “voted in favor of the [treaty] in the committee because ratification would signal to the world that the U.S. is committed to continuing its role as the international leader in disability rights.”
But hold on… wait until you hear what came next. Isakson’s office actually added that the treaty “will not erode our sovereignty.” Is he serious?
Perhaps, but it’s more than certain that Isakson and far too many of our Republican leaders didn’t bother to read Article 46 of the CRPD, which explicitly states: “Reservations incompatible with the object and purpose of the present Convention shall not be permitted.”
Isakson and Company should know better; but they don’t. Mike Farris said: “They lack the knowledge to execute their offices AND IT’S SHAMEFUL.” [Emphasis Ours]
One thing is certain. When our elected officials are done picking up the mountains of faxes that will spill from their overflowing fax trays onto their floors… they won’t be able to use the excuse that they “lacked knowledge.”
So let’s make our demands known. Tell our elected officials in no uncertain terms, with an election approaching, that there will be dire career-ending consequences UNLESS they send the opposition a clear message that even bringing this treaty up for a vote is an effort in futility. We want them on record… and we want it in writing.
UN Continues NWO Course
John R. Houk
© September 26, 2012
GOP Senators Pushing Constitution Subverting UN Treaty
The Western Center for Journalism is a 501©3 educational organization. Contributions are tax-deductible as allowed by IRS regulations. Personal and corporate contributions are allowed.
The Center for Western Journalism
42104 N Venture Drive Suite B-122, Anthem, AZ 85086 (202) 370-6366
[SlantRight Editor: The WCJ email had blue, red, bold and italics for points of emphasis. I am not taking the time to include the emphasis in this post except perhaps where the emphasis is noted within the email.]
NoGuff writes about the Leftist program of Agenda 21 to evaporate American sovereignty by making us dependent on food from foreign nations.
How many times must I point this out? Agenda 21.
“Food shortages could force world into vegetarianism, warn scientists”
Sunday 26 August 2012
“Water scarcity’s effect on food production means radical steps will be needed to feed population expected to reach 9bn by 2050″
THIS IS PLANNED!!! This is all part of Agenda 21- Use government and public pressure to:
1. Create tax structures to wipe out all private & small farms, especially meat/poultry producers (happening now)
2. Create laws and policies to divert production of feed for livestock into BS “green energy” production which will send livestock feed prices (and human food prices) sky-high so as to put farmers out of business (happening now for 10yrs)
3. Create socio/political negativity surrounding meat consumption, and publish “predictions” and “findings” to get the public used to the idea of consuming less meats (happening now for over 10yrs).
And it’s ridiculous that they’re blaming it all on drought (another “global warming” scare tactic). We’ve had droughts before, friends. Didn’t mean we were altering man’s future. And please don’t tell me there’s no room for future generations. How much land is there in Africa alone that has no people for miles?
Remember, the No.2 region for crop production in America was shut down and “returned to its natural state” (per Agenda 21 goals) of desert in central California, and now America, for the first time, regularly imports produce from Mexico and other nations. We’re no longer feeding the world and ourselves like we’ve been doing for 100yrs. If the Left really wanted to feed people they wouldn’t have done that.
This Leftist plan kills many birds with a few stones. It reduces America’s GDP, reduces America’s food production (and thereby, world food production), thereby creating a world with less food, toward the goal of food rationing and increasing human starvation to reduce the world population. And the food rationing will make slaves of us all. And no, I’m not kidding, no am I blowing this all out of proportion. Science fiction writers have predicted this, seen in many books. How many things created by HG Wells and Jules Verne have come to pass? A lot. Even James Cameron foresaw automated battle bots and flying drones. Now we have them, already.
Again, if you haven’t read up on Agenda 21, please do. There are plenty of videos about it on YouTube. [SlantRight Editor: From YouTube Search I typed ‘Agenda 21’]
John R. Houk
© July 26, 2012
One of the most horrendous acts of terrorism happened in Aurora, Colorado. James Holmes perpetrated a massacre of American theatre goers in Aurora, CO. He used guns and ammo he purchased legally.
The American Left has jumped on this massacre of innocent people as an excuse to promote gun control at the expense of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. There is a reason our Founding Fathers desired that have the right to bear arms. If the British confiscated weapons prior to the Revolutionary War, Americans might have declared Independence in vain as the Red Coats swept through the American colonies enforcing British authority and hanging the signers of the Declaration of Independence for treason against the King that imposed taxation and confiscation without representation. There would not have been a USA as we know it today that even our foreign detractors flock to America for Freedom and Liberty.
On July 27 the United Nations might get the USA to join a global treaty that is in essence global gun control that will rob Americans the right to protect themselves from criminals and a potentially unjust government that is leaning more and more toward Leftist ideology. Leftist ideology will further be inculcated in America if Obama is elected combined with a Democratic Party majority in the Senate.
We need to fight the United Nations Small Arms Treaty today and remove Obama from the White House on Election Day 2012.
Urgent video UN and Hillary don’t want you to see
Sent by Christine H
Originally from Dudley Brown
Sent: 7/25/12 10:50 AM
Did you see Congressman Paul Broun’s urgent video message yesterday?
The fight against the UN Small Arms Treaty is heating up RIGHT NOW!
And you and I only have until THIS FRIDAY July 27th to prepare for battle.
So if you haven’t already, please watch Congressman Broun’s video for all the details.
– Christine H
From: Dudley Brown [email@example.com]
To: Christine H [firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2012 9:00 AM
Subject: Urgent video UN and Hillary don’t want you to see
Dear fellow Patriot,
My friend, Congressman Paul Broun, has prepared an urgent video message regarding the United Nations Small Arms Treaty.
As you know, the wannabe dictators at the UN are plotting RIGHT NOW to gut the Second Amendment.
And we only have until July 27th to prepare for battle.
Please click here to see Congressman Paul Broun’s urgent message on the UN Small Arms Treaty.
Once the UN passes this global gun grab, President Obama will do everything in his power to force it through the U.S. Senate.
We will have just days to respond.
After you listen, be sure to sign the survey putting yourself squarely on record AGAINST this radical treaty.
Executive Vice President
National Association for Gun Rights
National Sovereignty or U.N. Sovereignty?
John R. Houk
© July 26, 2012
Urgent video UN and Hillary don’t want you to see
The Real Nature of Politics and Politicians: America’s System Works, but Not the Way You Think!
Few of the lectures I give on political technology and campaigning make people as agitated as this one.
None is more important.
Simply put, politics is not about the common good, appealing to men’s better angels, nor serving our Lord. These may be your motivations. I pray they are mine. Occasionally, they will be a politician’s motivation.
Politics is the adjudication of power. It is the process by which people everywhere determine who rules whom.
In America, through a brilliant system of rewards and punishments, checks and balances, and diffusion of authority, we have acquired a habit and history of politics mostly without violence and excessive corruption.
The good news for you and me is that the system works.
The bad news is it is hard, and sometimes unpleasant work, for us to succeed in enacting policy.
There is absolutely no reason for you to spend your time, talent, and money in politics except for this: If you do not, laws will be written and regulations enforced by folks with little or no interest in your well-being.
The following pages may challenge everything you thought you … READ THE REST
Shame on me! When I get behind in reading my email notifications I let slip some important ones. One such important email is from Let Freedom Ring Executive Director Alex Cortez alerting the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) is being rammed through the current Democrat controlled Senate. LOST is yet another treaty that yields another chunk of American sovereignty to the United Nations.
The Cortez email briefly lists the evils of LOST and then points Let Freedom Ring President Colin Hanna’s Op-Ed at FoxNews.com which goes into greater detail why LOST must not become part of the American rule of law.
Senator Mike Lee from Utah questioned Secretary of State Hillary Clinton about LOST. Colin Hanna hails Senator Lee and claims Hillary was not as informed as Senator Lee. Here is the Lee-Question and Hillary-Answer from Senator Lee’s Senate website. Do you think Hillary is blowing smoke to obfuscate Senate Lee’s questions?
The point of the email and Colin Hanna’s Op-Ed is that the Dems are trying to work LOST under the radar with amazingly some Republican support for it.
Below is the Cortez email followed by the Colin Hanna article on FoxNews.com.
Let’s Lose LOST!
By Alex Cortez
Sent: 5/29/2012 2:52 PM
Sent by Let Freedom Ring
Have you seen Let Freedom Ring President Colin Hanna’s op-ed featured on FoxNews.com today entitled Congress needs to tell Law of the Sea Treaty to get LOST?
The editorial discusses how The Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) empowers international bureaucrats to:
1) Force American energy companies to give money to an international body that can redistribute it to our enemies
2) Force these same companies to share proprietary technology with our economic competitors and military adversaries
3) Impose destructive environmental codes on us
4) Decide lawsuits brought against us by our enemies
Over 10,200 letters from patriots like you have already been sent to Senators asking them to Lose LOST! If you haven’t already taken action, go to www.LetsLoseLOST.com today and let YOUR Senators know where YOU stand!
Congress needs to tell Law of the Sea Treaty to get lost
By Colin Hanna
May 29, 2012
The American political system is still coming to grips with the loss of sovereignty resulting from the START treaty, rammed through the last Congressional lame duck session.
Flush with enthusiasm at how well that worked out, the Senate leadership is now repeating the pattern.
Last Wednesday, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee held a one-sided hearing addressing the ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea or, as it is more commonly known, the “Law of the Sea Treaty” (LOST).
LOST has been around in various forms for decades. When it was first completed in 1982 President Ronald Reagan refused to sign it, citing provisions that were contrary to U.S. long term strategic and economic interests.
After a series of revisions, President Bill Clinton enrolled the U.S. in the treaty in 1994 but the United States Senate has, to date, failed to ratify it as the U.S. Constitution requires.
The Senate now taking the first step down the path toward another attempt at ratification. Led by Massachusetts Democrat Sen. John F. Kerry, it featured testimony from Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, all of whom want the Senate to give its stamp of approval to LOST.
No one who opposes the treaty was invited to appear.
Moreover the ideological single-mindedness on this issue between recently-defeated but still-serving Indiana Sen. Richard Lugar, the ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Sen. Kerry, the chairman, meant the hearing was devoid of balance.
Another legislative ram job seemed about to occur, even though even thought the LOST supporters don’t seem to understand the threat that it poses to American sovereignty. That is, until Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) began to challenge Secretary Clinton on some of the fine points of the treaty.
Clinton came off as flustered and ill-informed, as it became clear to even the casual observer that the freshman Utah Republican had delved quite deeply into the treaty and its sovereignty implications, while she was captive to her talking points.
People are, for example, seemingly unaware that the treaty contains a backdoor tax increase on U.S. businesses that would be used to fund the operations of the international organization charged with overseeing it and could force America into the a Kyoto-style “cap and trade” system that would further damage the nation’s industrial productivity and move U.S. government funds offshore to yet another international body.
Oklahoma Republican Sen. James Inhofe – another treaty opponent – pointed out during the hearing that, according to a “conservative” estimate by the U.S. Extended Continental Shelf Task Force, the United States would transfer $70 billion to the International Seabed Authority, the organization charged with overseeing LOST.
The politics of the issue are clear.
The internationalists, joined by the environmentalists, many in the business community and those who support the redistribution of global wealth are for it.
Those who see a militarily and economically strong United States as the best guarantor of political freedom and opportunity are against it.
Lee, Inhofe and South Carolina Republican Sen. Jim DeMint are showing real leadership in opposing LOST’s ratification along with a handful of their colleagues who have studied what is in the treaty and gone on record against it.
So, too, at least in the only fashion available to it, has the U.S. House of Representatives, which constitutionally has no role in the treaty process but does control the nation’s purse strings. It recently approved an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 offered by South Carolina Rep. Jeff Duncan and Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan that would ban federal funds from being use to implement the treaty if the Senate chooses to ratify it.
The Duncan-Jordan Amendment is a much needed “shot across the bow” against LOST.
Wanting to secure peace is an admirable sentiment, but not at the expense of U.S. naval superiority.
Ratification of LOST would produce a forceful change in American policy dating back over two centuries that holds that a strong United States Navy is the best guarantor of freedom of the seas.
Under LOST, the responsibility for preserving freedom of the seas would be relegated to a United Nations body whose mission is to resolve conflicts before they become shooting wars.
Let’s just say we’ve been down that road before, and it did not lead to peace.
During the period between the First and Second World Wars, the global powers developed a series of treaties intended to prevent war. Beginning with the Treaty of Versailles, which ended World War I, to a series of naval weapons limitation treaties, the United States, Japan, and the European powers placed their hopes for peace on a set of agreements that were supposed to produce a balance of naval power that would virtually guarantee the signatories would not go to war.
As history demonstrates, those efforts were futile.
The democratic states abided by them while the dictatorships in Germany, Italy and Japan did not. They cheated in ways that were fully apparent — but the world turned a blind eye to their dishonesty. This left the democracies at a distinct disadvantage and ill-prepared when war eventually came.
Peace, as Ronald Reagan famously said, is best secured through strength. Placing our trust in international agreements governed by bureaucratic global bodies whose representatives may not adhere to democratic values is to risk disaster.
The Law of the Sea Treaty, as an effort to police the maritime waterways and establish a code of behavior, harkens back to the agreements that gave cover to those whose belligerence eventually led to the Second World War.
America must rely upon itself, not international bodies under the United Nations.
Is it not foolish to believe, as Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta suggests, that Senate ratification of the treaty would produce a change in the behavior of the Chinese or the navy of any other ambitious country seeking to enlarge its power?
As its supporters point out, the terms of the treaty have been in force for nearly a decade, yet the Chinese, who are signatories, are even now behaving in ways that run counter to its restrictions. Why should the U.S. make itself a full party to a treaty the Chinese ignore when it is in their interest to do so?
Sen. Kerry has promised additional hearings will be held at which time LOST’s opponents will be able to make their case. He also suggested that no vote on ratification would come before the November election, which sounds a lot like the health care bill or the newest START treaty all over again.
To assume that LOST would secure “freedom of the seas” better than a strong U.S. Navy, as the Obama administration now seems to be saying in its argument in favor of ratification, is a naïve and dangerous proposition, a choice that this former Navy officer thinks the nation should not make.
The Senate should reject the treaty if it comes up for a vote on the Senate floor, whether in the regular or a lame duck session.
Let’s Lose LOST!
©2012 Let Freedom Ring, Inc. All rights reserved.
Let Freedom Ring is a non-profit, nonpartisan public policy membership organization, with a three-pronged mission statement.
Our mission is to promote:
v Constitutional government
§ Original intent of the Framers of the Constitution
§ Limited (Federal) government
§ Separation of powers (Judiciary not legislating, etc.)
v Economic Freedom
§ Free enterprise and equal opportunity
§ Social Security Reform — to achieve financial independence, not dependence
§ Profit as an economic incentive
v Traditional values
§ Family as the basic building block of society
§ Sanctity of life
§ Religious liberty, not restraint of religious speech
About Let Freedom Ring
Let Freedom Ring was formed to counter the attacks of anti-conservative groups on patriotic candidates as well as attacks on the important issues of our day – those that affect the core of our … READ MORE
Congress needs to tell Law of the Sea Treaty to get lost
Colin Hanna is president of Let Freedom Ring, a Pennsylvania-based public policy organization.
©2012 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved.
Conspiracy Theorists have claimed for decades that the United Nations Agenda 21 was a process with the goal of creating a One World Government ending the sovereignty of nations. Such a World Government would threaten the Rights and Liberties that have made the United States of America a great nation.
Also for decades Democrats and Republicans have called the Agenda 21 Conspiracy Theorists a fringe Right Wing group of nuts. As the U.N. has actually been successful in implementing much of its Eco-Marxist ideal on a local level in America the warnings about Agenda 21 is not now considered a fringe movement. Regardless of typical Left Wing tactics to portray Agenda 21 opponents as crack pots, local governments within each State are beginning to recognize Agenda 21 intrusions and are enacting local laws as far as the extent of State sovereignty still exists in the USA to roll back Eco-Marxist land management that has been taking place under the direction of United Nations bureaucracy. An international body of government is a foreign government. I assure you the rules and regulations of the United Nations are somewhat different than our U.S. Constitution. We do not want foreign entities acting as arbiters of the Rights and Privileges of American Citizens.
Below is an email from the Center for Individual Freedom (CFIF). It addresses the dangers of Agenda 21 and how local governments are dealing with Agenda 21 and the American wing of Eco-Marxism known as the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI).
Freedom Crushing UN Agenda 21
Sent: May 23, 2012 10:56 AM
Sent by CFIF
STATES STRIKING BACK AGAINST JOB-KILLING, FREEDOM-CRUSHING U.N. AGENDA 21
URGENT: If the Obama Administration, United Nations and radical environmentalists at all levels of government get their way, Americans will quickly become one-world subjects governed by the global body rather than land-owning sovereign citizens with inalienable rights.
Fortunately, some states are starting to fight back. But we must make our voices heard now against U.N. Agenda 21 before our sovereignty and the American way of life are forfeited to the extreme agenda of U.N. bureaucrats forever.
The United Nation’s Agenda 21 was developed 20 years ago as an attempt to impose the extreme environmentalist agenda globally — including in every state, city and town in the United States. Masked as a “green initiative,” it seeks to dictate and control every aspect of our lives.
Specifically, at risk from Agenda 21 are, among other things:
§ Private property rights;
§ The ability to choose what vehicle we drive and even our very means of travel, and
§ Private ownership of family farms
What’s scary is Agenda 21 is already taking hold in states and municipalities across America.
In fact, the U.S. subsidiary of the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) — the international body charged with implementing Agenda 21 at the local level — claims nearly 600 local governments in 49 states in America today. George Soros’ Open Society has given more than $2 million to ICLEI to support implementation of Agenda 21 at the local level.
As one commentator wrote in a piece published in The Blaze:
“Do you support your local government agreeing to rules and regulations set up by a UN-based organization that wants private property transferred to government control?”
Of course not. But that is exactly what could happen if we don’t sound the alarm against Agenda 21 right here and right now!
Implementation of the U.N.’s Agenda 21 is not just confined to the local level. Indeed, Barack Obama’s utopian vision for a “green economy” and “sustainable development” can be traced directly back to Agenda 21.
And it is no coincidence that much of the radical job-killing agenda being rammed down our throats by Obama’s EPA seeks some of the very same goals outlined in Agenda 21.
Private property rights, energy independence, freedom — to Agenda 21 supporters these are all just pesky barriers to achieving their goals. And they will stop at nothing to knock down those barriers to implement the U.N.’s Agenda 21.
Fortunately, however, some states and patriotic Americans are starting to wake up and fight back!
Local Tea Party groups have begun petitioning their local governments to withdraw from membership in the ICLEI USA. The Republican National Committee in January passed a resolution exposing U.N. Agenda 21 and warning against its implementation.
And now seven states have proposed similar resolutions to warn their citizens, policymakers and local governments about the dangers of implementing Agenda 21.
But the fight is proving to be an uphill battle that needs grassroots Americans to make their voices heard in order to win.
The Tennessee legislature passed an anti-Agenda 21 resolution, but Governor Bill Haslam refused to sign it.
Last week, the Kansas House passed a similar resolution that, among other things, condemns any attempts by any Federal agency to implement Agenda 21 within Kansas’ borders. Of course, the pro-Agenda 21 forces are doing everything in their power to kill it.
The Kansas resolution reads as follows:
Session of 2012
House Resolution No. 6032
By Committee on Federal and State Affairs
A RESOLUTION opposing and exposing the radical nature of United Nations Agenda 21 and its destructiveness to the principles of the founding documents of the United States of America.
WHEREAS, The United Nations Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of environmental extremism, social engineering and global political control that was initiated at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1992; and
WHEREAS, The United Nations Agenda 21 is being covertly pushed into local communities throughout the United States of America through the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives through local “sustainable development” policies such as Smart Growth, Wildlands Project, Resilient Cities, Regional Visioning Projects and other “Green” or “Alternative” projects; and
WHEREAS, This United Nations Agenda 21 plan of radical so-called “sustainable development” views the American way of life of private property ownership, single family homes, private car ownership, individual travel choices and privately owned farms as destructive to the environment; and
WHEREAS, The United States federal government nor any state or local government is legally bound by the United Nations Agenda 21, the influence of the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives has now infiltrated approximately 600 local and regional entities in the United States, with as many as 54 of such entities withdrawing enrollment during 2011, due to the negative consequences experienced through implementation of Agenda 21; and
WHEREAS, According to the United Nations Agenda 21 policy, social justice is described as the right and opportunity of all people to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment, which would be accomplished by redistribution of wealth:
Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the State of Kansas: That we recognize the destructive and insidious nature of United Nations Agenda 21 and hereby expose to public policy makers the dangerous intent of the plan; and
Be it further resolved: That the federal government and all state and HR 6032 local governments across the country should seek to be well informed about the underlying harmful implications of the implementation of United Nations Agenda 21 destructive strategies for “sustainable development”, and that we hereby endorse rejection of its radical policies; and
Be it further resolved: That the Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives shall send an enrolled copy of this resolution to each member of the Kansas Congressional Delegation.
Simply put, implementation of the U.N.’s Agenda 21 must be stopped. Every state must passed resolutions similar to the one above to expose the “underlying harmful implications of the implementation of United Nations Agenda 21 destructive strategies for ‘sustainable development’” and reject its “radical policies.”
If a groundswell of everyday Americans makes our voices heard, we can stop this radical U.N. agenda dead in its tracks.
Yours In Freedom,
Center for Individual Freedom
917-B King Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
CFIF is a 501(c)(4) not-for-profit constitutional advocacy organization
with the mission to protect and defend individual freedoms and individual rights.
Contributions to CFIF are not deductible as charitable contributions
for federal income tax purposes.
I received an email alert from AmeriPAC pertaining the Conspiracy Theory that I believe is closer to a Conspiracy Fact; i.e. Agenda 21. AmeriPAC sent the email via Red State Advocacy meaning it was a paid ad; nevertheless it is good to keep in mind that the United Nations has an agenda to revoke the sovereignty of nations and replace that authority with UN governance. The email has repetitive usage of a link to fax your Senator about the dangers of Agenda 21.
Here is the email:
UN Agenda 21 – Poison Pill For America
Obama’s New Green World Order
By Alan M. Gottlieb
Sent: March 6, 2012 2:02 PM
I have to be honest with you.
This is the most disturbing email I have ever written. I am frightened for our country. I am frightened for its freedom-loving citizens. But most of all, I am frightened for the future of America. Obama supports beating up the U.S. Constitution and we must not let it be replaced by United Nations Agenda 21.
The UN is ruthlessly advancing a new plan that will make America a HOSTAGE to the United Nations. While Obama and the liberal media ignore gas prices streaking to $5/gal. and England is already paying $10/gal.
UN Agenda 21 could…
· Wipe private property off the face of the earth.
· Force you and your family to live in a single-family energy efficient home.
· Confiscate private farms and farmland.
· Snatch away private landholdings.
· Ban individual ownership of cars.
Sound too outlandish to be true? The scariest part is… IT IS TRUE! So what exactly is Agenda 21? I’ll tell you in a minute. But first, I’ll give you some background information that is critical to understanding how this anti-freedom scheme came about.
In 1992, the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) was held in Rio de Janeiro to discuss global initiatives. 172 governments attended and 108 sent their heads of state. And about 2,400 representatives of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) showed up for the “GLOBAL FORUM.”
Tell The Senate To REJECT All Attempts To Implement UN Agenda 21! Support the U.S. Constitution – SEND FAXES TO ALL 100 SENATORS – NOW! and We will send you the book Black and Blue: How Obama and the Democrats are Beating Up the Constitution and our GET HOPE-Fire OBAMA Sticker!
This group of POWERFUL world leaders and environmentalists spent their time discussing typical green movement hogwash like alternative energy, the phony science of climate change and “deadly” car emissions. Back in 1992, most people dismissed this conference as a green rant fest.
However, that was a huge mistake…
…Because the politicians came up with a plan for a centrally ruled global society. They called that plan Agenda 21. The plan’s contract would make governments around the world a SLAVE to the every wish and whim of the United Nations.
We cannot make the same mistake with Agenda 21!
UN Agenda 21 would also dictate…
· Where we live
· What we eat
· How and what we learn
· Where and when we can move (if at all)
Here’s how the UN describes it:
“Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level.”
It’s already happening right now.
Obama, who has vowed to “fundamentally transform America,” is pushing to implement this freedom-grabbing plan UNDER THE RADAR.
On June 9, 2011 he signed EXECUTIVE ORDER 13575 and established the White House Rural Council (WHRC). This new administrative body is responsible for federally coordinating and implementing sustainable and green development locally.
Here is an excerpt from EO 13575:
Section 1. Policy- Sixteen percent of the American population lives in rural counties. Strong, sustainable rural communities are essential to winning the future and ensuring American competitiveness in the years ahead.
“Sustainable” became a buzzword at the UN’s 1992 Earth Summit in Brazil (where Agenda 21 was created).
Sustainable = Agenda 21
Mike Opelka of The Blaze reports,
“Warning bells should have been sounding all across rural America when the phrase “sustainable rural communities” came up. As we know from researching the UN plan for Sustainable Development known as Agenda 21, these are code words for the true fundamental transformation America.”
UN Agenda 21 is a transnational attempt to erode property rights, destroy freedom and make America submissive to foreign bureaucrats.
That’s why we need to act QUICKLY.
We don’t have much time to waste before this TOTALITARIAN TREATY BECOMES LAW OF THE LAND!
THIS IS NOT A FIGHT WE CAN AFFORD TO LOSE
1. Select Below – Tell The Senate To REJECT Attempts To Submit America To The UN.
2. Send this Alert to EVERYONE you know and every like-minded friend on your personal email list who wants to STOP the UN from encroaching on your God-given rights! We need to get HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of faxes delivered to EACH AND EVERY Senator. It’s time the Senate gets the message – LOUD & CLEAR!
3. Keep calling your Senators today, toll free numbers include 1-877-851-6437 and 1-866-220-0044, or call 1-202-225-3121 AND REGISTER YOUR OUTRAGE! Demand the Senate STOP Agenda 21 DEAD IN ITS TRACKS.
4. CALL President Obama, 202-456-1111 and 202-456-1414 expressing your disdain and ABSOLUTE REJECTION of the UN plan. Tell Obama that you DO NOT SUPPORT destroying personal property rights, confiscating private land and banning private ownership of cars.
5. Print this copy and pass it around where normal working class Americans gather who care about the future of our country. Polling data reveals that Americans treasure their Constitutional rights and personal freedoms. They DO NOT want to be controlled by DESPOTIC rule and CONCEDE to foreign leaders.
DO NOT BE SILENCED – MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD!
NOTE: We need TENS OF THOUSANDS of faxes and PHONE CALLS and EMAILS delivered TO ALL SENATORS RIGHT AWAY!
Your voice can be heard — we need your urgent help at AmeriPAC.
Alan M. Gottlieb
If you prefer to send a check, please mail to:
American Political Action Committee (AmeriPAC)
PO Box 1682
Dept Code 5224-redstate-rs
Bellevue, WA 98009-1682
Paid for by AmeriPAC, a federally-authorized and qualified multi candidate political action committee. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee. Contributions to AmeriPAC will be used in connection with federal elections. Maximum contribution per individual per calendar year is $5,000. Contributions from foreign nationals and corporations are prohibited. Contributions are not deductible for federal income tax purposes.
John R. Houk
© October 6, 2011
This WND article is about NATO and Turkey invading Syria with the blessing of the U.N. to end Assad’s tyranny against his own citizens. Sounds great!
There is a “but”. The theme for the attack is a Left Wing strategic doctrine: “Responsibility to Protect OR to Act“. Apparently it is a Soros based doctrine and Obama is all for it.
Responsibility to Protect, or Responsibility to Act, as cited by Obama, is a set of principles, now backed by the United Nations, based on the idea that sovereignty is not a privilege but a responsibility that can be revoked if a country is accused of “war crimes,” “genocide,” “crimes against humanity” or “ethnic cleansing.”
The Global Centre for Responsibility to Protect is the world’s leading champion of the military doctrine. Billionaire activist George Soros is a primary funder and key proponent of the Global Centre for Responsibility to Protect. Several of the doctrine’s main founders also sit on boards with Soros.
The article is about using force to make nations comply with a greater authority of responsible sovereignty. WND focuses on the NWO aspect. The article written by Aaron Klein should have included also what this strategy might imply for Israel, Palestine and Bush using the U.S. military with Congressional OK but not with a Congressional Declaration of War.
The NWO thing is significant on a global scale pertaining to Free Speech, Religious Freedom, Property Rights, and the freedoms guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution that is absent or watered down in other Western nations. This you can read about this in the Klein article.
Frankly I thought it was a great thing to bring down psycho-terrorist supporting Moamar Qaddafi. It was a rare occasion of brilliance by Obama to utilize NATO as the brunt of the support for the Libyan rebels while keeping significant American troops off the ground. However, using the doctrine of Responsibility to Protect as the justification opens the door to an irresponsible use. For example Israel is often accused of being an apartheid State by Western Leftists (particularly in Europe) and Muslim nations might be an excuse for an Arab sympathetic American government to use military power to force Israel accept a Palestinian State that would have the constitutional preamble of destroying Israel and killing Jews.
Of course no American President would have the guts to say that the existence of a Palestinian State would have a purpose of destroying Israel and killing Jews; nonetheless the reality of the existence of an Arab nation called Palestine will evolve into an existential threat to the existence of the Jewish State of Israel.
Israel is again facing a situation in which the land is surrounded with openly hostile Muslim forces. The new Egypt is beginning to the line of Jew-hatred and anti-Israel animosity toward Israel. Lebanon has ceased to be a Christian jewel of acceptance among Muslim nations or from Lebanese Muslims. Hezbollah controls the reins of power in Lebanon. Hezbollah has a throw the Jews into the sea mentality. Syria has had a hate Israel thing since their existence and particularly under the rule of the Assad family. The only nation bordering Israel that may or may not contribute to the demise of Israel is Jordan. There is no love from Jordanians for Israel; however the Jordanian Monarchy has an ingrained distrust for Arabs that call themselves Palestinians because they have no commitment to the Monarchy which is supported by Jordanian Bedouins. In Jordan itself Palestinian-Arabs outnumber Bedouin-Arabs. Arabs that are descendants of the refugees caused by invading Arab armies are treated as second class citizens in Jordan to assure they do not the political power to toss out the Hashemite Monarchy of Jordan.
I can see the doctrine of Responsibility to Protect as a ploy to force Israel to 1967 borders which include pilfering the eastern half of Jerusalem which is a Jewish city founded by the ancient Jewish King David. It is the Star of David that is on the Israeli flag. This Power to Protect could be an excuse for Obama to take a step back as European nations and perhaps various Muslim nations such as Turkey and Egypt to cause the Third Diaspora removing Jews from their heritage.
I don’t like it. Do you?
John R. Houk
© September 19, 2011
It is expected the U.N. General Assembly is ready to vote into existence a sovereign Palestinian State at the expense of Jewish heritage and Israel’s existence. It is equally true the U.N. General Assembly does not have the legal right according to its own Charter to confer Statehood on Palestinian sovereignty. The act of creating sovereignty is in the hands of the U.N. Security Council. The best the Palestinians can expect is the designation of a non-voting Observer entity.
On the other hand Observer status will undoubtedly lead to a load of complications as the non-sovereign Palestine will be afforded all the covenant and treaty applications of Member States; e.g. joining the International Criminal Court and that body’s already confirmed willingness to prosecute Israel for accused war crimes that should be better leveled against Islamic Palestinian terrorists.
The United States, whether it is from the American Ambassador or from President Obama, should in no uncertain terms hold the General Assembly to account. I have serious doubts about BHO’s commitment to Israel’s existence. You might ask: What’s it to America in desiring U.N. compliance to protecting Israel’s heritage and security? The pesky Third World and Islamic nations should pay attention to American influence or suffer the withdrawal of American financial support to the U.N. Body in general. Hello! America pays the biggest bill to support the U.N. budget.
With such dependence on U.S. money, it is silly to allow a bunch of Muslim and Left Wing Multicultural nations dictate something that most Americans would not agree with even though the Obamasiah might agree with (AND yet another reason to NOT vote for Obama in 2012).
You need to read what Ari Bussel writes (Below my thoughts at SlantRight.com) about the Anti-Semitic U.N. General Assembly that has the desire to give sovereignty to a group of people that cannot even take care of themselves because their entire economy is based on the foreign dole and the generosity of the very nation Muslim wish to destroy.
John R. Houk
© December 31, 2010
Have you heard of State Nullification? The concept of State Nullification is actually nothing new in America. The concept of State Nullification is a Tenth Amendment issue as usually expressed by Conservatives; however there are undoubtedly some issues that Leftists might attach the concept of State Nullification as well.
State Nullification is roughly the ability of one of America’s sovereign States can ignore a Federal Law passed by Congress or instituted as a regulation by some bureaucratic Federal Agency. By “ignore” I mean a State can nullify the Federal Law if it is felt to Unconstitutional. Nullification is not ignoring a Constitutional Federal Law. That would be insurrection. The concept of a sovereign American State leaving the Union merely because a State did not like a Constitutional Law was settled at the end of the Civil War. States’ Rights do not include seceding from the Union of the United States of America. Again State Nullification is the ability of a sovereign State to nullify or render void a Federal Law arguably is Unconstitutional.
State Nullification is the States’ Rights alternative to the old Confederacy’s decision to secede from the USA. Alan Caruba looks at some Federal government intrusions that might be considered Unconstitutional by America’s sovereign States that might bring up the issue of State Nullification in 2011.
JRH 12/31/10 (Hat Tip: Tony Newbill)