The Swiss Made A Big Mistake

[Flanders]

Americans never had the chance to reject membership in the United Nations. Now that filthy piece garbage in the White House can bring in as many America-hating United Nations refugees as he desires. Notice that the number one America-hater is wearing an American flag lapel pin:

http://www.newsmax.com/CMSPages/Get...3f718458efd8&SiteName=Newsmax&maxsidesize=600

Obama Vows to Stick by Pledge to Resettle 10,000 Syrian Refugees
By Brian Freeman | Tuesday, 14 Jun 2016 12:58 PM

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/obama-vows-pledge-resettle/2016/06/14/id/733793/​

Just a reminder that 200,000 is the goal. That is sure to grow to millions:

U.S. plots with United Nations to expand Syrian refugees from 10,000 to 200,000
By Paul Bedard
4/25/16 7:21 PM

U.S. plots with United Nations to expand Syrian refugees from 10,000 to 200,000​

In 2002 the Swiss had the option of rejecting membership in the United Nations:

Switzerland shuts the door on EU migrants: A new 'us vs. them' in Europe?
By Sara Miller Llana, Staff writer / April 25, 2013

Switzerland shuts the door on EU migrants: A new 'us vs. them' in Europe?​

Switzerland taking control of its immigration policy flies in the face of everything the open-borders crowd has been pushing for decades.

I don’t know if there is a connection, but Switzerland did not join the United Nations until 2002:​

After nearly two centuries of neutrality, Switzerland became the 190th member of the United Nations on Tuesday with the unanimous support of the General Assembly.

XXXXX​

. . . Switzerland was the only nation to decide to join the United Nations after a popular referendum. . .​

After years of neutrality, Switzerland joins United Nations
By Vanessa Arrington
The Associated Press

Nation & World | After years of neutrality, Switzerland joins United Nations | Seattle Times Newspaper​

I can’t help thinking the vote to join the UN would be different were it held today.​

Clocks, Cheese & Open Borders

At least one village is not happy about the United Nations flooding their country with Muslims:

Swiss village chooses to pay £200,000 fine instead of accepting 10 refugees as 'they won't fit in'
By James Rothwell
30 May 2016 • 10:38am

Swiss village chooses to pay £200,000 fine instead of accepting 10 refugees as 'they won't fit in'​

Did you ever hear even one Democrat mention the United Nations in their attacks on Donald Trump because he would stop Muslims from coming here until the war is over? What do think the number of Americans killed by Muslims will be after United Nations refugees arrive in the tens of thousands. The only thing you will hear from Democrat scum after every massacre is “DISARM AMERICANS” accompanied by phoney touchy-feely compassion for everybody except Americans.

NOTE: Asshole Bill Clinton getting a B.J. must have addled his brain when he said:

“Did you see how dark it was?” Clinton said. “It’s likely that more people would have been killed.”​

Bill Clinton: More people would have died if clubgoers were armed
By Jonathan Easley
June 14, 2016, 12:23 pm

Bill Clinton: More people would have died if clubgoers were armed​

I guess the asshole thinks Muslims will not kill anyone in broad daylight.

Finally, Donald Trump has not tied Hillary Clinton, or the Chicago sewer rat, to the United Nations Muslim refugee problem coming down the road. I do not know what is holding him back?

 

[Flanders]

Donald Trump has not tied Hillary Clinton, or the Chicago sewer rat, to the United Nations Muslim refugee problem coming down the road.

Forget Hillary’s failures, espionage, corruption and scandals. Forget the foreign money pouring into her campaign coffer. Put her world order double-talk rhetoric on par with her position on open-borders.

Ruling classes in foreign countries represent the world order Clinton wants to protect. How has that worked out so far?

This is how Donald Trump can carpet bomb everything Clinton says about foreign policy every time she opens her lying mouth:

“Clinton to Paint Trump as a Risk to World Order.”

XXXXX​

“Clinton to Portray Trump as Risk to the World.”

The Times promoted the speech as “scorching,” a “sweeping and fearsome portrayal of Mr. Trump, one that the Clinton campaign will deliver like a drumbeat to voters in the coming months.”

XXXXX​

Clinton contends that a Trump presidency would be a national embarrassment, that his ideas are outside the bipartisan mainstream of U.S. foreign policy, and that he is as contemptuous of our democratic allies as he is solicitous of our antidemocratic adversaries.​

Hillary Rejects ‘America First’
Patrick J. Buchanan | Friday Jun 3, 2016 9:15 AM

Hillary Rejects 'America First' | Human Events​

America-haters the world over love Clinton because they know she means the United Nations when she says world order —— but the haters do not get to vote —— while a vast majority of Americans across the board despise the United Nations; hence, they despise the world order Clinton brags about. That is the true “. . . bipartisan mainstream . . .” Clinton claims as her own.

Trump has only to press her until she admits she is talking about surrendering America’s sovereignty to the world order. Rest assured, she will screech her patriotism, as she did in the past even if she refuses to admit her first loyalty. The way she lies about it will say it for her.

Hillary Clinton dare not admit that she represents the United Nations —— not the American people, nor the Constitution she swears to defend and protect, nor anything that made this country great. Trump does not have to promise to make this country great again. That will come automatically after Hillary Clinton and everything she stands for is exposed —— and ERASED.

One final observation. Hillary Clinton is certain she has a world order ace in the hole: There has been no nuclear war thanks to the United Nations. That is not an ace it is a joker. Hillary Clinton’s bloody record prove that does not oppose killing, she opposes nuclear war because she and her kind might get blown to hell by mistake.

Thanks to 71 years of movies and media propaganda pumping up the United Nations, too many Americans are now convinced that a nuclear death is more to be feared than is fighting for liberty. In their minds dying in a nuclear blast is worse than being beheaded by a Muslim, or dying in a skyscraper after a plane hits it. Death came to those people on 9-11-2001 without warning just as a nuclear or a chemical attack will come from today’s enemies as surely as Hitler invaded Poland in spite Neville Chamberlain’s assurances. The important consideration is this: Dead is dead and tyranny is tyranny no matter how they come; so isn’t it better to defend yourself fighting for something instead dying one of Hillary Clinton’s victims?

 

[Flanders]

“Did you see how dark it was?” Clinton said. “It’s likely that more people would have been killed.”

I guess the asshole thinks Muslims will not kill anyone in broad daylight.

Another asshole heard from:

President Obama today criticized the notion that the victims in Orlando would have been safer had one or more of them been armed. Such an idea, Obama proposed, “defies common sense.” In taking this approach, the president echoed comments that Bill Clinton made earlier in the week:​

Of Course It Would Have Been Better If Somebody Had Shot Back
by Charles C. W. Cooke
June 16, 2016 5:41 PM

Of Course It Would Have Been Better If Somebody Had Shot Back​

Aside from the “sundown excuse” why do two Democrat presidents assume that armed law-abiding Americans in a crowd will always be far away from the shooter? Indeed, the odds are in favor of at least one person carrying a gun for self-defense will be close to a shooter when he pulls out a gun.

 

[ScienceRocks]

As long as they vote for infrastructure, science, r&d and education. Well,

 

[Flanders]

NOTE: Asshole Bill Clinton getting a B.J. must have addled his brain when he said:

“Did you see how dark it was?” Clinton said. “It’s likely that more people would have been killed.”

Aside from the “sundown excuse” why do two Democrat presidents assume that armed law-abiding Americans in a crowd will always be far away from the shooter?

The defense rests:

Lt. Bobo said the man who shot Mr. Thompson, who has not been identified, has a valid concealed weapons permit and will not face any charges.​

Concealed carrier takes down shooter at South Carolina nightclub
By Jessica Chasmar - The Washington Times - Thursday, June 30, 2016

Concealed carrier takes down shooter at South Carolina nightclub​