Archive for the ‘United Nations’ Category

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) on Saturday warned President Barack Obama was working on behalf of “anti-American globalists” in the United Nations who were plotting against the U.S. Constitution.

In a fundraising email sent on behalf of the National Association on Gun Rights, Paul alleged the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty was a secret plot to completely
American civilians.

“Ultimately, UN bureaucrats will stop at nothing to register, ban and CONFISCATE firearms owned by private citizens like YOU,” Paul wrote. “So far, the gun-grabbers have successfully kept many of their schemes under wraps. But looking at previous attempts by the UN to pass global gun control, you and I can get a good idea of what’s likely in the works.”
8447

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) on Saturday warned President Barack Obama was working on behalf of “anti-American globalists” in the United Nations who were plotting against the U.S. Constitution.

In a fundraising email sent on behalf of the National Association on Gun Rights, Paul alleged the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty was a secret plot to completely disarm American civilians.

“Ultimately, UN bureaucrats will stop at nothing to register, ban and CONFISCATE firearms owned by private citizens like YOU,” Paul wrote. “So far, the gun-grabbers have successfully kept many of their schemes under wraps. But looking at previous attempts by the UN to pass global gun control, you and I can get a good idea of what’s likely in the works.”

Paul said the United Nations would “CONFISCATE and DESTROY ALL” of civilian firearms in the United States and ban the sale of all semi-automatic weapons. He also alleged the United Nations was controlled by “petty dictators and one-world socialists” who were plotting to usurp American sovereignty.

“These anti-gun globalists know that as long as Americans remain free to make our own decisions without being bossed around by big government bureaucrats, they’ll NEVER be able to seize the worldwide power they crave,” Paul wrote.

The United States voted with 153 other nations to approve the treaty in April, but it still needs to be ratified by the U.S. Senate. Republicans have vowed to block the treaty.

by Steve Quayle
Hi Steve,

My husband called me a little while ago to let me know that he saw something strange. He is a trucker and was driving outside Omaha, Nebraska, in Thurston County on some back roads. Along the road he spotted about 16 soldiers in uniforms he had not seen before, which were blue, black and gray. The troops did not look like Americans, and glared at him as he passed. There were five jeeps with no markings, and the troops were moving quickly to unload trailers and get it into the timbers. He didn’t know what they were unloading, but he said it gave him chills. He called a friend who keeps up on these things, and he said they were UN troops.

The Obama administration has long made it clear that it was intrigued by United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (“ATT”) which, if enacted, will control or prohibit ever civilian arms shipment anywhere in the world. Republicans and a handful of Second Amendment Democrat Senators have been so worried about the Obama administration’s flirtation with the UN ATT that the Senate passed an amendment to stop the Obama administration from entering into the ATT.

Nothing was going to stop Obama, though. Despite Senate objections, on March 28, the Obama administration engaged in an underhanded maneuver that ensures the ATT will pass despite America’s non-participation. Now, although Obama sat out the vote (after ensuring that the treaty would pass) Obama has announced that he will sign the treaty on June 3, on behalf of the United States of America.

The ATT will negatively affect American firearms. It will allow the UN to exert control over (and block) all civilian firearm imports into the United States (such as Glock, which Obama’s media wants to destroy), lessening the overall availability of guns. This, combined with the DHS’s massive weapons and ammunition buying spree, will leave even fewer guns for the civilian and law enforcement markets. In addition, the treaty imposes costly, and often prohibitive, restrictions on firearms imports, which will cover everything from shipping containers to sportsman traveling abroad.

The Senate still has to ratify the treaty by a two-thirds majority. Although the Democrats control the Senate, they cannot automatically call upon the 67 votes necessary to ratify the treaty. Nevertheless, by signing on to the ATT, Obama has signaled to the world that his administration will cooperate willingly with those nations that have enacted and intend to enforce the treaty – even if that means severely limiting Americans’ constitutional access to guns.

You remember Richard Falk — the UN Human Rights Council special rapporteur who last month wrote an article blaming America for the terrorist bombings of the Boston Marathon. Falk suggested these horrific attacks were part of the post-colonial world’s natural “resistance” to “the American global domination project.” In response, more than two dozen members of Congress called for Falk — an American academic — to be fired from his UN post.

Now, according to a dispatch by Fox News editor-at large George Russell, the U.S. State Department is saying that Falk cannot be fired — because the rules of the Human Rights Council contain no provision for firing any of the Council’s dozens of special rapporteurs. That’s quite plausible; the UN also lacks any provision for removing a secretary-general (as became evident during the Oil-for-Food scandal, on Kofi Annan’s watch). It is also absurd, and in practice not quite credible. When UN senior officials want to, they can be quite creative about sidelining or ousting inconvenient personnel — though such maneuvers seem more often reserved for whistleblowers than for those peddling the anti-American or anti-Israel vitriol in which the UN specializes.

But in the case of Falk, it looks like both the State Department and the UN Human Rights Council will defer politely to the UN’s lack of rules for firing a special rapporteur. His earliest departure date will be May of 2014, when his six-year term expires. At which stage, as Russell notes, Falk could run for another post as a special rapporteur for the Human Rights Council, which is packed with countries sympathetic to his style.

It gets worse. Russell has also unearthed the information — buried in a 183-page report from the UN’s External Board of Auditors — that Human Rights Council special rapporteurs, such as Falk, are not required to disclose any support they might get from institutions or individual governments. The basic arrangement is that these rapporteurs usually work for a token $1 per year, but the UN Human Rights Council covers their expenses which, according to documents obtained by Fox, can range from about $240,000 to almost $600,000 per year.

In other words, while UN special rapporteurs appear to be doing altruistic work for a token fee, the Human Rights Council has effectively issued them a license to operate under the UN logo, expenses paid by the UN — and at the same time, allows them to accept funding from who-knows-whom with who-knows-what-agenda, and no requirement to disclose any of it. Oh, and P.S., there is no provision for firing them (see above, and read Russell’s piece in full). It may happen that some of these special rapporteurs try to operate with integrity. But this is yet another instance in which, if the UN had set out to design a crooked setup, it’s hard to think how they could have done a better job of it. It’s time to think bigger than firing Richard Falk. How about finding a way to fire the entire Human Rights Council?

by Claudia Rosett

Are America’s treasured National Parks being co-opted by the New World Order under the guise of designating them World Heritage Sites, thus allowing foreign troops and United Nations agencies to take over our country in a soft coup d’etat? A blogger has photographed heavily equipped armored vehicles carrying the “Special Response Team” logo in and around the Great Smoky Mountains National Heritage site in Gatlinburg, TN. (1) ”It is a deadly serious piece of equipment never before used inside the US until now,” says the blogger “Sherrie” who then adds, “The vehicles don’t come more heavily armored.”
Sherrie has put up several pictures of these in-country tanks which she said she saw on and near Interstate 75 when she was traveling back roads near Winchester, Richmond, KY, and lists Rt. # 627 as an area of interest. “This spot is (around) the US Army Chemical Depot” which covers 14,000 acres in Kentucky backwoods,” the blogger says on the video which the Liberty web site is putting up for general viewing. She mentions chemical weapons involving 523 tons of nerve agents and shows aerial photography of train tracks going up to several buildings in this compound! “I’m not sure what they are,” she says, positing the notion of a possible FEMA camp in the Kentucky woods.
Now in addition to sighting of MRAP vehicles, “Sherrie” tells readers that “Russians were stopping and questioning people in the Gatlinburg, Smoky Mountain Parks region.” She quotes a high ranking individual in a local area state militia organization who she says she trusts as being truthful. The scenario developed when these apparently foreign troops wearing DHS uniforms with the Eagle insignia tried to enter Tennessee from Kentucky. “They were NOT Americans. . .appeared to be Russian or Eastern European!”
The Tennessee State Guard is being formulated as part of the 22 state Governors’ Militia Organization of volunteers which answers only to the Governors, not to the Federal government. (2) What has developed is the confiscation of equipment belong to National Guard Units nationwide. Trucks and other equipment sent to Iraq are not being replaced or returned to the states by the federal government because it is “too expensive” to transport the vehicles and equipment back into the country. This has prompted 22 governors to form State Militia Units paid for by the states and thus kept out of the reach of the federal government. (2)
Has the Division of Homeland Security partnered with the United Nations One World military apparatus with a sleight of hand operation known as World Heritage Site designation? The observant blogger lists these US treasures also as being so designated: Statue of Liberty, Everglades, Mammoth Cave, Yellowstone, Yosemite, all former National Parks. Folks, this designation and UN involvement coincides with the ten region DHS map of the United States! Has this under-the-radar give away of America already taken place, thus allowing the constitutionally prohibited onus of foreign troops being stationed on American soil? What is your Congress doing about this?

A new United Nations report says that people living in rich countries should eat half as much meat as they usually do in order for people in poor countries to eat more without harming the environment.

UN scientists said that billions of people in poor countries should be allowed to eat more animal protein, reports the Guardian. But in order to protect the environment, the increased consumption of meat products poor countries must come at the expense of meat consumption in rich countries.

“Eat meat, but less often — make it special,” Professor Mark Sutton, the author of a UN Environment Program study, told the Guardian. “Portion size is key. Many portions are too big, more than you want to eat. Think about a change of culture that says, ‘I like the taste, but I don’t need so much of it.’”

The growth in meat consumption in rich countries has diverted large amounts of grain to raising livestock and required the extensive use of fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides which has helped cause “a web of water and air pollution that is damaging human health,” according to the UN report.

The Guardian reports that “[t]he run-off from these chemicals is creating dead zones in the seas, causing toxic algal blooms and killing fish, while some are threatening bees, amphibians and sensitive ecosystems.”

“The attention this meat scare has drawn [highlights] poor quality meat. It shows society must think about livestock and food choices much more, for the environment and health,” Sutton said.

Sutton told the Guardian that he wants Europe to pioneer the change in diet because it will be harder to change people’s minds in the US.

“Unless action is taken, increases in pollution and per capita consumption of energy and animal products will exacerbate nutrient losses, pollution levels and land degradation, further threatening the quality of our water, air and soils, affecting climate and biodiversity,” warns the report.

Follow Michael on Twitter

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/02/19/the-un-wants-rich-countries-to-eat-less-meat-so-poor-countries-can-eat-more/#ixzz2LPNMQh5F