Tag Archives: UN

The United Nations Agendas: A Totalitarian Map, by Rosanne Lindsay

Why would anyone be surprised that one world government plans would emanate from the closest thing we already have to one world government, the United Nations? From Rosanne Lindsay at activistpost.com:

If you connected all the dots to the various United Nations (U.N.) Agendas, would you create a map of mass regionalization and an eventual Totalitarian State?

Let us count the ways…

Agenda 21: Global Regional Plans Implemented Locally

According to the author of Behind the Green Mask, Rosa Koire says that “U.N. Agenda 21 is an agenda for the 21st century. It  is an inventory and control plan; inventory of all land, water, all minerals, all plants, all animals, all construction, all means of production, all food, all energy, all information, and all human beings in the world.” It’s about moving populations into concentrated city centers and clearing them out of rural areas under “Smart Growth.” Under the guise of “Sustainability,” Agenda 21 is the hijacking of the environmental movement.

Agenda 21 is top-down hierarchy, moving away from current government structure based on elected positions in Federal-State-County-City, to a global-regional-neighborhood structure without elections. Currently hundreds of millions of federal dollars are going to cities to create regional plans to give over control of land, and land use, to corporations. For instance, the federal government gave the Telecom Industry new powers to sidestep over the public right-of-way for the roll out of 5G technology by removing regulatory barriers that might prevent infrastructure.

Continue reading

Advertisements

A Veritable Feast of Reality, Choice, and Consequences, by Doug “Uncola” Lynn

Doug “Uncola” Lynn tracks the many ways the world is going to hell. From Lynn at theburningplatform.com:

Someone I care about got into some trouble the week before Thanksgiving. They asked for my help, and I wasn’t raised to say “no” in such situations. What ensued were a series of unfortunate events that staggered my mind and challenged my previously naive vision of a moderately benevolent universe.

By any definition, any knowledgeable neutral party would say I did everything right, in spite of the dire turn of events that, fortunately, resulted in only a minor loss of time and money on my part; with a still positive outcome for the party I helped.

Even now, looking back, I realize I’d have made all the same decisions with the same information I had at the time. Yet, the mostly-positive denouement of the entire affair resulted in a conclusion I never dreamed possible at the start.

It had to do with a car accident, an insurance claim, buying a lemon, and ultimately enjoying some fine lemonade in the end. The party who I helped is now better off than if my original plans were realized. I will say, however, it was darkest before the dawn, and things should have ended much worse.

Continue reading→

 

UN Member States: Migration Is a Human Right, by Judith Bergman

The ultimate goal is to make anybody who can sneak into wealthier countries eligible for those countries’ benefits. From Judith Bergman at gatestoneinstitute.org:

  • It cannot be stressed enough that this agreement is not about refugees fleeing persecution, or their rights to protection under international law. Instead, the agreement propagates the radical idea that migration — for any reason — is something that needs to be promoted, enabled and protected.
  • The UN has no interest in admitting that its agreement promotes migration as a human right; until recently, there has been little debate about it. More debate might risk jeopardizing the entire project.
  • UN member states are not only supposed to open their borders for the migrants of the world, but should also help them pick and choose their future country by providing them with comprehensive information about each country they may wish to settle in.
A new UN agreement, which almost all member states plan to sign in December, propagates the radical idea that migration — for any reason — is something that needs to be promoted, enabled and protected. Pictured: Migrants walk through fields towards a holding camp in the village of Dobova, Slovenia on October 26, 2015. (Photo by Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images)

The United Nations, in a non-binding agreement that almost all UN member states will sign at a ceremony in Morocco in early December, is making migration a human right.

Continue reading

The UN Fraudulently Addresses “Extreme Poverty” in the United States, by Francis Menton

SLL disagrees with US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley’s positions on many issues, but not this one. From Francis Menton at gatestoneinstitute.org:

  • You may be aware that the UN actually has an official definition of “extreme poverty,” which is “liv[ing]… on less than $1.90 per person per day.” $1.90 per day would come to just under $700 per year.
  • An April 2018 study by John Early for the Cato Institute found that counting the $1.2 trillion of annual redistributions toward the income of the recipients — a sum often misleadingly excluded from poverty statistics — reduces the official poverty level in the U.S. from 12.7% all the way down to about 2%. And the remaining 2% would be people who for some reason had not sought out the benefits.
  • In other words, the U.S. distributes to its low-income residents resources beyond their income equal to an additional 40 times per person the amount officially deemed by the UN to constitute “extreme poverty.”

Is the United Nations a group of people of good faith, joining together in the effort to help bring peace and justice and economic development to the world? Or is it a group of haters of freedom and capitalism engaged primarily in spewing ignorance, malice or both toward the United States? For a clue, you might take a look at the “Report of the Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights on his mission to the United States of America,” recently issued by the UN’s so-called Human Rights Council.

Yes, this is the same Human Rights Council from which the U.S. just announced its withdrawal. It is also the same Human Rights Council that includes among its members China, Cuba, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela — with ambassadors who think that the best use of their time and resources is to criticize the economic and human rights record of the U.S.

The UN’s Report grew out of a two-week (December 1-15, 2017) “visit” to the United States by an Englishman, Philip Alston, designated the “Special Rapporteur.” After its issuance in May, the Report drew more attention than it might have otherwise because on June 12 it brought forth a letter to UN Ambassador Nikki Haley from a collection of Members of Congress, led by Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, expressing supposed “deep concern” about the findings. This letter in turn provoked a sharp rebuke from Haley on June 21.

To continue reading: The UN Fraudulently Addresses “Extreme Poverty” in the United States

World Domination: UN Continues Fight To Disarm All Americans, by Mac Slavo

When the Second Amendment goes, the rest of the Bill of Rights will be right behind. From Mac Slavo at shtfplan.com:

The United Nations is gearing up for round two in the fight to disarm the American public. Last month, the United Nations’ International Action Network on Small Arms (IANSA) held a week-long conference geared towards making gun control an international priority.

Wanting world domination, the global elites are seeking to prevent Americans from being able to escape the slavery they have planned for everyone by enacting “global gun control.” According to Townhall‘s Beth Baumann, during RevCon3, the conference on the program of action on small arms and light weapons, the UN’s Secretary-General, Antonio Guterres had a message delivered on his behalf.  It reads, in part:

Every year, over half a million people are killed violently around the world, mostly through small arms fire.

Those pulling the trigger may be soldiers, border guards or police, using their weapons as a last resort, in accordance with the principles of necessity, proportionality and restraint. Some are private security guards or civilians, using a registered firearm for protection or in self-defence.

But the huge majority of those who kill with small arms do not fit this description. They may be members of armed groups who are terrorizing people of a country or a whole region with killings and sexual abuse. They could be members of national security forces who are abusing their power. They might be terrorists aiming to destroy lives and sow fear; criminals holding up a grocery store; or gang members killing those who get in the way of a drug deal.

Tragically, many of them are men using an illegally-acquired weapon against the women who are their partners. In some countries, more than 60 percent of killings of women are committed with firearms.

Illicit small arms are also used against United Nations peacekeeping forces. In 2017, 56 peacekeepers died in violent attacks – the highest number in over two decades.

Controlling and regulating small arms therefore requires action that goes well beyond national security institutions. It includes providing alternative livelihoods for former combatants, engaging with municipal governments and police, working with civil society, including grass-roots organizations and community violence reduction programmes, as well as local businesses.

To continue reading: World Domination: UN Continues Fight To Disarm All Americans

Trump — American Gaullist, by Patrick J. Buchanan

Proponents of individual nation-states call it sovereignty, opponents call it nationalism. Whatever it’s called, it’s a movement away from globalism and supranational organizations. From Patrick J. Buchanan at buchanan.org:

If a U.S. president calls an adversary “Rocket Man … on a mission to suicide,” and warns his nation may be “totally destroyed,” other ideas in his speech will tend to get lost.

Which is unfortunate. For buried in Donald Trump’s address is a clarion call to reject transnationalism and to re-embrace a world of sovereign nation-states that cherish their independence and unique identities.

Western man has engaged in this great quarrel since Woodrow Wilson declared America would fight in the Great War, not for any selfish interests, but “to make the world safe for democracy.”

Our imperialist allies, Britain, France, Russia, Japan, regarded this as self-righteous claptrap and proceeded to rip apart Germany, Austria, Hungary and the Ottoman Empire and to feast on their colonies.

After World War II, Jean Monnet, father of the EU, wanted Europe’s nations to yield up their sovereignty and form a federal union like the USA.

Europe’s nations would slowly sink and dissolve in a single polity that would mark a giant leap forward toward world government — Alfred, Lord Tennyson’s “Parliament of man, the Federation of the world.”

Charles De Gaulle lead the resistance, calling for “a Europe of nation-states from the Atlantic to the Urals.”

For 50 years, the Gaullists were in constant retreat. The Germans especially, given their past, seemed desirous of losing their national identity and disappearing inside the new Europe.

Today, the Gaullist vision is ascendant.

“We do not expect diverse countries to share the same cultures, traditions, or even systems of government,” said Trump at the U.N.

“Strong sovereign nations let diverse countries with different values, different cultures, and different dreams not just coexist, but work side by side on the basis of mutual respect. …

“In America, we do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but rather to let it shine as an example for everyone to watch.”

Translation: We Americans have created something unique in history. But we do not assert that we should serve as a model for mankind. Among the 190 nations, others have evolved in different ways from diverse cultures, histories, traditions. We may reject their values but we have no God-given right to impose ours upon them.

To continue reading: Trump — American Gaullist

Unexpected North Korea Breakthrough Delays Trump Trade War With China (For Now), by Tyler Durden

SLL is prepared to cheer any progress on the North Korea front short of war. From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

A global punitive campaign on North Korea propelled by sharp new U.N. sanctions – amounting to a $1 billion ban on North Korea exports – received a welcome, and unexpected, boost on Sunday from China, the North’s economic lifeline, when Beijing slammed its neighbor for its ongoing missile and nuclear tests.

The Saturday sanctions agreed to unanimously in a 15-0 Security Council vote are aimed at cutting North Korean exports by about $1 billion a year, a move that would hit laborers and fishermen. Existing joint ventures would be prevented from expanding their operations. The new sanctions could cut off roughly one-third of North Korea’s estimated $3 billion in annual exports, ostensibly denying the nation of funds for its weapons programs. All countries are now banned from importing North Korean coal, iron, lead and seafood products, and from letting in more North Korean laborers whose remittances help fund Kim Jong Un’s regime.


U.N. Security Council members vote on toughening sanctions on
North Korea in New York, on Aug. 5.

 However, what was most remarkable about the vote is that both China and Russia backed it, siding – for the first time in a long while – with the US on matters of foreign policy.
And, as Bloomberg summarizes, just days after geopolitical events looked bleak at the start of last week when leaders of the world’s biggest economies appeared set on collision course after North Korea’s second ICBM text in a matter of weeks prompted Trump to lash out at China on Twitter, followed by reports that his administration was getting ready to take steps that could lead to a trade war, all that changed with the “breakthrough” vote at the United Nations on Saturday.

President Trump was delighted, tweeting on Saturday afternoon that “The United Nations Security Council just voted 15-0 to sanction North Korea. China and Russia voted with us. Very big financial impact!”

Even, one of Trump’s most vocal critics, former US ambassador to Russia, Michael McFaul congratulated Trump on his “genuine foreign policy achievement”:

Congratulations @realDonaldTrump . This vote is a genuine foreign policy achievement. https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/893965986566733824 

To continue reading: Unexpected North Korea Breakthrough Delays Trump Trade War With China (For Now)