United Nations B/S

Discussion in 'Congress' started by American_Jihad, Jun 1, 2012.

  1. American_Jihad
    Offline

    American_Jihad Flaming Libs/Koranimals

    Joined:
    May 1, 2012
    Messages:
    8,634
    Thanks Received:
    1,900
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Gulf of Mex 26.609, -82.220
    Ratings:
    +3,241
    Is the UN the Next Big Threat to Internet Freedom?

    6/1/12 By Mathew Ingram

    Even as Internet-control bills such as SOPA and PIPA were making their way through the Senate and House of Representatives earlier this year (only to be short-circuited by public opinion), another potential firestorm was brewing just beneath the surface—one that is expected to erupt in a matter of months in Dubai. That’s because the International Telecommunications Union, an arm of the United Nations, wants very much to take over management of the Internet, a plan that will be debated by member nations in Dubai. On Thursday, a bipartisan group of U.S. congressional officials said they will resist this attempt with everything they have. But will it be enough?

    Read More: Is the UN the Next Big Threat to Internet Freedom? - Businessweek

    [​IMG]
    [+ Theft, Murder & Rape]
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 3
    • Informative Informative x 1
    Last edited: Jun 1, 2012
  2. Luddly Neddite
    Offline

    Luddly Neddite Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2011
    Messages:
    53,216
    Thanks Received:
    8,455
    Trophy Points:
    2,040
    Ratings:
    +20,829
    Not surprising that nut job rw's hate an organization whose only purpose is to promote peace.

    Only thing worse than the UN is that horrible ACLU whose only purpose is to protect our Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  3. Meister
    Offline

    Meister VIP Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2009
    Messages:
    25,900
    Thanks Received:
    8,099
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Conservative part of the Northwest
    Ratings:
    +8,100
    Now that is rich. :lol:
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. Mad Scientist
    Offline

    Mad Scientist Deplorable Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    23,936
    Thanks Received:
    5,211
    Trophy Points:
    270
    Ratings:
    +7,676
    "Luddite" here might just be the most uninformed person on the web.

    DARPA created the internet with tax payer dollars, why would ANYONE want to give away control of it?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2012
  5. Mad Scientist
    Offline

    Mad Scientist Deplorable Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    23,936
    Thanks Received:
    5,211
    Trophy Points:
    270
    Ratings:
    +7,676
    The ACLU only takes cases that they have an interest in.

    If you think they have an interest in protecting Constitutional Rights, you would be mistaken.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  6. American_Jihad
    Offline

    American_Jihad Flaming Libs/Koranimals

    Joined:
    May 1, 2012
    Messages:
    8,634
    Thanks Received:
    1,900
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Gulf of Mex 26.609, -82.220
    Ratings:
    +3,241
    UN and aid workers accused of abusing children

    Jun 24, 2008 By Twitter

    UNITED NATIONS (FinalCall.com) - A European charity organization, Save The Children UK, accused humanitarian aid workers and UN peacekeepers of sexually abusing and sexual trafficking children in several war-torn and food-poor nations.


    “It’s hard to imagine a more grotesque abuse of authority or flagrant violation of children’s rights,” said Jasmine Whitehead, of Save the Children UK. In interviews, children said they engaged in prostitution, pornography, traded food for sex and were raped. The report was released in late May.

    This report is a blessing, said attorney Marguerite Laurent, chairwoman of the Connecticut-based Haitian Lawyers Leadership Network. “In Haiti, children as young as six were sexually abused by peacekeepers and aid workers, according to the report; and by the lack of media coverage it would seem that the world doesn’t care,” Ms. Laurent told The Final Call.
    ---

    UN and aid workers accused of abusing children
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  7. RoadVirus
    Offline

    RoadVirus <insert pithy title here>

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2008
    Messages:
    5,277
    Thanks Received:
    574
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Location:
    Illinois
    Ratings:
    +583
    The UN's doing a great job promoting peace in Syria, just ask the men, women and children killed at the hands of the Syrian military.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  8. Meister
    Offline

    Meister VIP Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2009
    Messages:
    25,900
    Thanks Received:
    8,099
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Conservative part of the Northwest
    Ratings:
    +8,100
    From what I've been reading over the years, the UN is a bunch of 2nd, 3rd world countries hell bent on redistribution of wealth in the world.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 3
  9. American_Jihad
    Offline

    American_Jihad Flaming Libs/Koranimals

    Joined:
    May 1, 2012
    Messages:
    8,634
    Thanks Received:
    1,900
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Gulf of Mex 26.609, -82.220
    Ratings:
    +3,241
    Kinda like OIL FOR FOOD...:eusa_shifty:
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  10. ERGO
    Offline

    ERGO Bursting Bubbles

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2012
    Messages:
    354
    Thanks Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +42
    The United Nations Treaty is Unconstitutional


    The history of how the United Nations was created is a classic case of diplomacy by deception. The United Nations is the successor to the defunct League of Nations, the first attempt to set up a One World Government in the wake of the Paris Peace Conference which gave birth to the Treaty of Versailles.

    Treaty of Versailles:Pawns in the Game - 10

    In the case of the United States, the plan is not to overthrow the U.S. government or its Constitution, but to "make it negligible." This has largely been accomplished by slowly and carefully implementing the socialist manifesto written in 1920 by the Fabian Society, which was based on the Communist Manifesto of 1848.

    Isn't this making of the Constitution "negligible" exactly what is happening? In fact when the U.S. government violates the Constitution on an almost daily basis with total impunity, it makes the Constitution "negligible." Executive orders, such as going to war without a declaration of war, as in the Gulf War, have worked to make the Constitution "negligible." There is absolutely no provision in the Constitution for executive orders. Executive orders are only proclamations which the president has no power or authority to make. Only a king can make proclamations.

    The warmed over League of Nations was thrust upon the U.S. Senate in 1945, dressed under a new label: the United Nations Treaty. The senators were given only three days to discuss the implications of the treaty, which could not have been fully examined in under least a full 18 months of discussion. Had the senators properly understood what they were discussing, which, apart from a few exceptions, they did not, there would have been a demand for a proper period for discussion. The fact is that the Senate did not understand the document and therefore should not have voted on it.

    Had the senators who debated the United Nations treaty properly understood the document it surely would have been rejected. Apart from any other considerations, the document was so poorly written and, in many instances, so vague, deceptive and contradictory, that it could have been rejected on these grounds alone.

    A law, which is what a treaty is, must be clearly written and unambiguous. The U.N. Treaty was far from that. In any case, the United States, bound by its Constitution, could not ratify the U.N. treaty, for the following reasons:

    1) Our Constitution rests upon the bedrock of sovereignty, without which there can be no constitution. U.S. foreign policy is based upon Vattel's "Law of Nations" which makes sovereignty the issue. Although the Constitution is silent on world government and foreign bodies, when the Constitution is silent of a power, and it is not incidental to another power in the Constitution, then it is an inhibition of that power, or a PROHIBITION of that power.

    2)The United Nations is not a sovereign body, having no measurable territory of its own. It is housed on U.S. territory in New York in a building loaned by the Rockefellers. Under the U.S. Constitution, we cannot make a treaty with any nation or body that lacks sovereignty. The United States could not (and cannot) make a treaty with a body or country having no sovereignty. The U.S. can make an agreement with a country or body having no sovereignty, but can never enter into a treaty with a body lacking in sovereignty.

    3) For the Senate to have attempted to ratify a treaty with a body, state, or country lacking sovereignty, defined boundaries, demographics, a currency system, a set of laws or a constitution, to whit, the United Nations, was to betray the oath to uphold the Constitution which senators are sworn to do. This is commonly called treason.

    4)In order for the United States to become a member of the United Nations, two amendments to the Constitution would have to be passed. The first amendment would have to recognize that a world body exists. In its present form, the Constitution cannot recognize the United Nations as a world body. A second amendment would have to say that the United States can have a treaty relationship with an unsovereign world body. Neither amendment was ever offered, much less accepted by the Senate and ratified by all of the States.

    Thus, the thoroughly suspect U.N. "treaty" never was a legal law in the United States. As matters stood in 1945, and as they stand today, although the President has the power to have a say in foreign affairs, he does not have the power, nor has he ever had the power, to make an agreement &#8212; much less a treaty &#8212; with a world body. This absolutely means that no other world body, specifically, the United Nations, has jurisdiction to deploy American servicemen and women, or to order the United States to act outside of the Constitutional restrictions imposed by our Founding Fathers.

    Source Link: Diplomacy By Deception by Dr. John Coleman
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: Jun 7, 2012

Share This Page