United Nations B/S

[American_Jihad]

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

[+ Theft, Murder & Rape] ​

 

[Luddly Neddite]

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.

 

[Meister]

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.

Now that is rich.

 

[Mad Scientist]

"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?

 

[Mad Scientist]

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.

 

[American_Jihad]

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

 

[RoadVirus]

Not surprising that nut job rw's hate an organization whose only purpose is to promote peace.

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.

 

[Meister]

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.

 

[American_Jihad]

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.

Kinda like OIL FOR FOOD...

 

[ERGO]

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 — much less a treaty — 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

 

[American_Jihad]

UN Spins In Circles While Syria Spins Out of Control

Posted by Joseph Klein
Jul 19th, 2012

---

On the very same day of this attack, and shortly before the United Nations observer mandate in Syria is due to expire on July 20th, the feckless United Nations Security Council was preparing to vote on a resolution offered by the United Kingdom that was supposedly designed to up the ante to deal with the Syrian crisis. The vote was postponed for a day at the urging of UN-Arab League envoy to Syria Kofi Annan, the former UN Secretary General.

---

In a rare bit of candor for a UN diplomat, the current president of the Security Council, Columbian Ambassador Néstor Osorio, conceded in response to my question that there wasn’t really very much that the Security Council or the United Nations could do in any event to solve the Syrian crisis.

---

UN Spins In Circles While Syria Spins Out of Control | FrontPage Magazine

 

[Vidi]

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.

Peace through censorship is not a peace worth having.

The ACLU is the most conservative organization in America...and I'm not joking...and I love them for it.

 

[Vidi]

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 — much less a treaty — 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

Regarding the sovereignty issue, the Constitution makes no such distinction.


He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

 

[American_Jihad]

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.

Peace through censorship is not a peace worth having.

The ACLU is the most conservative organization in America...and I'm not joking...and I love them for it.

"The ACLU is the most conservative organization in America"

Hey Bidi, You're dumber than a fvcking rock...

 

[American_Jihad]

Why Does the UN Still Exist?

7/25/12
by Kenneth Anderson

Corrupt and ineffective, it falsely promises that global governance and peace are near at hand.

What exactly is the United Nations and, for that matter, why is there still a United Nations at all? How has it managed to survive over time, from 1945 down to the present—given its long record of underperformance, frequent outright failure, and even more frequent irrelevance?

On the United Nations’ core issues—collective peace and security, development, and universal human values and rights—its record is mediocre, unless one counts sheer institutional persistence as enough. And that record is particularly poor concerning the issue from which the collective sprang in 1945: international peace and security through the collective itself. Why, then, has not the ruthless evolutionary logic of history pruned it as a failed institutional sapling in a relentlessly competitive forest, as the League was pruned?

The textbooks in international law and organizations provide one set of answers to account for the persistence of the United Nations. They tell us the heroic story of the United Nations’ founding in 1945 and the first meetings in San Francisco; Eleanor Roosevelt et al. They tell us about the efforts of the Second World War Allies to create an organization that would be able to establish true collective security and avoid the fatal—and predictable—errors of international organizations that yielded, among other things, the failed League of Nations and the naïve Kellogg-Briand Pact. They describe the present-day organization as an attempt to provide global governance in a recalcitrant world. They tend, above all, to tell a progressive moral history—“Whig history”—of advances toward greater and better international order through international law and organizations.

Read more about the bullshitting UN:

Why Does the UN Still Exist? | Hoover Institution

 

[American_Jihad]

---
UN Illegally Shipped American High Tech to Iran​

by Daniel Greenfield
Sep 18th, 2012

Also North Korea. Because the UN has a deep abiding love for any regime that kills its people by the thousands.

The controversial shipments of U.S.-made computer equipment to North Korea and Iran by the United Nations’ World Intellectual Property Organization was not only “unjustified” but something “we simply cannot fathom,” according to an independent investigative report, commissioned by WIPO itself.

In the newest case involving North Korea, the WIPO goods, ostensibly part of a routine technology upgrade for that country’s patent retrieval system, included along with ordinary laptop computers and other goods a “very capable” hardware firewall and network security system that is subject to “a very high level of U.S. licensing requirements” for so-called “dual-use” items, which have a number of non-civilian applications.

This is another reason why sanctions are completely useless. Saddam easily used corrupted UN employees to get his regime anything he wanted.

---

UN Illegally Shipped American High Tech to Iran | FrontPage Magazine

 

[American_Jihad]

United Nations looks to extract significant profit from Brazilian offshore oil bonanza

Kurt Wayne
9/24/12


Over the weekend, the Rio de Janeiro newspaper O Globo published this story about the United Nations looking to grab (the verb that the newspaper used translates "to bite") up to 7% of profits of the emerging gigantic offshore oil fields off southeastern Brazil.

On the surface, this story is somewhere in significance between President Obama's eagerness to support Brazilian energy independence (at the expense of our own) and the onerous treaties the United Nations would like to foist on America...the United Nations claim to the sub-equatorial oil is from the Montego Bay treaty of years back. Brazil's "Pre-salt" oil fields contain potentially 60-80 billion barrels of oil and 1 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, which could translate into hundreds of billions for the U.N. Leaving aside the potential payoffs to the President's friends at Turtle Bay, this brings up a different question.

---

The "Pre-salt" areas of Brazil, by contrast, are in basins 20,000 feet below the Atlantic Ocean surface, a few hundred miles off Brazil's coast. Again, most residents there might not be aware of any drilling activity until there's a problem. The two largest metropolitan areas on the Gulf of Mexico (Houston, metro population 6 million and Tampa/St.Petersburg, 2.8 million) never really saw effects from the Deepwater Horizon incident. By contrast, the pre-salt area lies off the coast between São Paulo (nearly 20 million) and Rio de Janeiro (11.5 million). Think of New York City being a couple hundred miles down the coast from Los Angeles, with a gigantic fleet of deep water oil rigs not far off the waters between them. The Brazilians are experts at offshore drilling having 50 years of experience in it, but accidents have happened. Several oil spills have occurred in areas there such as the Bay of Guanabara right next to Rio. If a significant accident ever occurs, untold numbers of residents in Brazil's two largest metropolitan areas could be affected.

One would think that the U.N., and President Obama, would want to do everything possible to protect 30+ million human beings and untold amounts of marine wildlife from the potential, possibly incalculable disaster of a ruptured sub-Salt oil platform. But apparently, petroleum-induced danger doesn't mean that much when there are piles of money to be had.


Read more: Blog: United Nations looks to extract significant profit from Brazilian offshore oil bonanza

 

[freedombecki]

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

It's horrific how pedophiles infiltrate humanitarian groups who help children to get their kicks. This happened in 2008. I hope they fixed the problem. I've heard pedophilia is the most difficult of criminal anomalies to fix. People who do the deed and get caught have a high recidivism rate. I can imagine it's a crime like others in that they are such effective communicators to children they seduce as to what will happen to people they love if they tell, that it's hard to catch them timely and treat the sickness at an early stage. After years of indenturing into the pattern that pedophilia is as a sickness, it's surely nigh on to impossible to fix.

 

[American_Jihad]

UN Now Openly Interfering in Presidential Election​

October 22, 2012
By Daniel Greenfield

First we’re getting election monitors, thanks to requests from the NAACP and other groups associated with the Democratic Party who for some reason claim that their own Attorney General running the most intrusive and abusive DOJ since RFK is incapable of handling the job.

The observers, from countries such as Germany, France, Serbia, Belarus, Ukraine and Kazakhstan, will observe voting at polling places and other political activity.

Kazakhstan hasn’t held a single election deemed fair by those same observers… which eminently qualifies it to observe US election fairness.

But then Ben Emmerson, a notorious defender of terrorists and the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Counter-Terrorism and Human Rights decided to go ahead and threaten Americans with legal action if they vote for Romney.

---

UN Now Openly Interfering in Presidential Election

 

[DeciduousHorns]

Will other stalwarts of democracy and freedom such as Iran, Russia, and Venezuela -- all three accused of election fraud -- be participating in this U.N. endeavor?

Alas, cry the beloved country. . . .