Wednesday, September 27, 2006

America at War

I have posted a rather long essay about America at War(under the blue flag of the UN) at my blog. I am linking it here only because it is long.

If we cannot get the US out of the UN, at least we should not be providing the UN with a military force that they are ill-equipped to lead. They (as a group) are at cross-purposes with the United States and want us to be defeated in wars. In the process, they have no care for how many of our men and women are killed. They probably care even less for the Iraqis who are murdered in the streets.

The UN members have no spine for America winning any war. They want to pontificate, posture, and preen. Fluff their feathers and strut. We can let them distribute food but we are on a fool's errand to even consider them or their "resolutions" much less their approval for us to go to war.

Never again should one of our Presidents go to them for "approval" to do what he knows is in the best interest of the American people. Never!

Setting all the man-made complexities aside, when Citco Hugo called our president the devil on our soil and the tin-horn despots clapped and laughed, they all spit in our face.

Then and there, the trucks should have pulled up to the loading docks, the sea containers packed, and their asses shipped home. But you say, "They'll align with China and Russia, Beach Girl. What are we to do?" And I say, "They are already aligned with China and Russia. China will soon be drilling our oil off of Cuba. Jeez! Dust off the Monroe Doctrine and keep them out of the Western Hemisphere. Oh, too late? Thanks, Jimmy."

Monday, September 25, 2006

UN Experience - A True Story

Since this is my first posting here following my invite, let me share with you what happened to me and my near-involvement with the UN.

My family had moved on three months before I did from Keflavik, Iceland. My next tour of duty was to be the Navy Yard in Washington DC. This would be what is called my twilight tour; it was early 1998 and I had only two more years to do in the navy before I retired with the full twenty.

Before I arrived in DC, my family and I purchased a home approx. three hours due south of DC. I could live in barracks during the week up in DC at Fort Myers in Arlington; from there, the Navy Yard was situated about fifteen minutes away.

I was just getting organized and was already into my sixth month in DC. On weekends, I would commute home, but only if I wasn't working. I worked shifts as a Communications Watch Officer (CWO) at the Navy yard and would also work over at the Pentagon on a part-time basis.

During this time, the so-called "war" was raging on over in Bosnia/Serbia/Kosovo. I can remember almost being in real trouble because at the time, I had voiced my opinions and beliefs that we were fighting against the wrong people there. NATO/K-FOR forces were bombing the hell out of Serb Catholic churches while we were actually aiding Muslims of Kosovo. I felt that this was wrong. I soon realized that Slobodan Milosevic was only doing what was good for his own people. To add confusion, all three were in the thick of the mix against one another, but the big picture was adding up as I learned that Macedonia was being dragged into the mix as well as Albania. The one good thing that Communist occupation did for that region was to quell the religious spats and territorial pissings that were raging on for hundreds of years there. To this day I don't understand why we were helping the Muslims out; maybe it was because here we had a chance to fight against one of our former adversaries' allies, Serbia. But still, I disagreed with this old ideaology because it was old Cold War thinking.

Anyway, on to the story; just setting up the scene here for what was about to happen to me.

The orders came over one of the printers that evening.

"Hey RM1," one of my operators called out. "You have a set of orders here for you to report to Kosovo in a month's time. Do you want to check this out?"

In the past, Radiomen in the US Navy would try and pull a prank on someone by drafting up fake orders and then posting a copy to the victim, making them freak out. Little did they know that I was on to them.

"Sure, go ahead. I wouldn't mind going over there." I added a snicker, but the operator immediately claimed that these orders were real.

And of course, they sure were.

The orders had me reporting to some UN commander in Kosovo. In effect, I was being told to report to some French guy.

Naturally speaking, I began to become very concerned here. Not only was I getting orders to a UN peace-keeping post - I was being sold out because I didn't believe in the UN nor did I appreciate their very existence in our country. For years I had felt this way. The UN was an evil, defunct organization that had lost a lot of power years ago; I held absolutely no respect for the UN and felt that they were an anti-Christian bloc, set determined to end borders and provide a multi-culturalistic society to the globe where we'd all live and work together in peace and harmony.

But I always felt that multi-culturalism was a joke; I was dead set against such an idea.

The following morning, I was tired, needless to say after a long and tedious watch that evening, and especially since I had been perusing this new set of orders. I would be away from home for about a year. I didn't want this and certainly didn't want to be away from my wife and children. Most importantly, I didn't want to end up being in a UN uniform and wearing a powder-blue beret, taking orders from a frog. No, this was certainly not my cup of tea, so off I charged to the bureau that morning to complain about these orders.

At the Navy Annex, I felt I was going nowhere. The detailer explained to me that because of my specialty code in communications, and because I was skilled in speaking Dutch, French and German, I was "perfect" for these orders. These orders, as impromptu as they were, this had happened to me once before. During my tour of duty stateside years before, I got orders to report within a weeks' time to Bahrain during Operation Desert Storm. I went of course, with the understanding that I was helping to fight against Iraq's occupation in Kuwait. Of course, back then, I was upset about leaving my family behind for nine months. But then again, I had no hard feelings against the nature of that assignment.

But this one was too much.

The detailer told me I had no choice to go. My wife was very upset as I was. She too, was not in favor of the UN. "How are you going to take orders from a Frenchman?" She said. I really didn't know. She knew this was against my grain. Not only was I going to have to fight against the Serbs, I was also going to have to put up with bullshit from a predominantly French peacekeeping force. It was against my principles, totally.

I had only one other option - get an attorney and fight my case.

I left the Navy Annex behind, remembering the threat that I'd never see another promotion if I fought these orders. So be it!

I went back to the Navy Yard and went to the Navy Judge Advocate office, where I spoke with a Navy Lawyer.

Navy lawyers are generally lieutenants or officers of a junior grade, or so I had thought. Here is was, sitting in the presence of a navy commander.

"So, you don't like these orders?" He said.

"No, because they go against my principles," I answered. I decided to come clean and add as much as I could against these orders. "I am sympathetic with our enemy," I told him. "We should be fighting against the Muslims," I added.

The commander looked dumbfounded. I told him that I was not at all in support of the UN and told him why.

After an hour meeting with the commander, I felt that I was wasting my time. On one occasion he drifted off; maybe he was just tired. I went back to my barracks room at Fort Myer. I was off from shift work for the next day. Instead of going all the way home, during my 24 hour period off from shift I would often go about the DC area for long walks to the Smithsonian.

The following morning, I took one of these long walks. Of course, the only thing on my mind was this set of orders. It consumed me. I really didn't want to go. At one point, I nearly made up my mind that I would just go AWOL and become a concsciencious objector against the UN and become a political refugee, take up roots in Canada like a cowardly hippie....but that was against my grain and beliefs. In conclusion, I felt I would have to go.

The following day, I received a call from the attorney. He asked if I could come by after my shift. Apparently, this guy wasn't your typical 9 to 5 attorney. He worked all kinds of hours.

He told me that I was in for a legal battle, and that I would have to request a summary courts-martial to petition against my orders. In effect, it was me vs. the United States Government. The thought of a long drawn out battle consumed me - but it would have to be done. I signed some paperwork and soon found myself being subjected to a courts-martial. I could end up in jail or could win my case.

About a month later, I found myself sitting in the legal building, awaiting trial. The process was arduous. I was basically accused of defying orders and was subject to two articles of the UCMJ. One was disobeying a direct order and the other one was violating the general order. The case opened up with a complete review of my entire military career, my past evaluations. I felt like a bug under a microscope.

They found nothing wrong with me because my record was immaculate. I was set for promotion to Chief Petty Officer but was told that this would smear my record. The fight would be worth it, however.

Well into two weeks later, one morning I was asked to recite my re-enlistment oath. My attorney asked me, in front of the panel of officers, to tell the panel where I was in my current enlistment period. I had, in 1996, re-enlisted for another four years. I went on, trying to remember that oath I had taken.

Nervous, I began reciting the oath:


The room fell quiet.

In conclusion, the court agreed that my oath didn't hold wind to my orders. It was assumed all along that military people would accept these orders to UN posts without realizing that their enlistment contract (if enlisted OR even officer) didn't prescribe them to the UN, but that subject orders would have to come from the US Govenment directly to the person receiving the orders.

Still, however, it remains in limbo; if you look at the oath above, you're obeying the orders of the president and the orders of the officers appointed over you, but at the same time, you're getting orders to support and defend an entirely different entity than the Constitution of the United States.

The conclusion came as a surprise to me. My rights were maintained, as well as the oath....the next step would have been for me to declare my current enlistment contract null and void and for me to leave the Navy. The only remaining problem would have been that I would be leaving early before retirement, but would get less of a retirement pay than planned.

In the long run, the orders were cancelled and I was allowed to continue my 'twilight tour' in Washington DC. I retired from the navy as planned, in 2000, and now happily live and work in Virginia.

Lesson learned: if you know someone that falls under the predicament of getting orders to the UN, have them read my story - there is a way out!

Friday, September 22, 2006

More Appropriate Seal

Thursday, September 21, 2006

Welcome to Korrupt Kofi's Annual UN Circus and Freak Show

Welcome one and all! Enter the UN Big Tent on Turtle Bay to see the world's most bizarre display of world leaders as they spout and spin, leap and bend, flip and flop!

This week has been one of the best shows in decades, we have gathered together the best to entertain you. Let us start with an Iranian freak, the Talking Jackal, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will entertain you by lying with a straight face, rapidly shifting the blame for the world's problems to America and Israel, and display his sense of humor with lines like "We are under the watchful eyes of the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency - the UN atomic watchdog) so what is the problem?" Oh, what a hoot that Mahmoud is, too bad he is dangerous, and needs to be caged to keep the world safe.

Next up we have Mahmoud's newest wife and South America's favorite Clown, Hugo Chavez. Hugo the Dog Faced Clown is known world wide for his seething hatred of America, in which he can't talk about without drooling and foaming at the mouth. His performance was one of his best, with his quote of "The devil came here yesterday," Chavez said, referring to Bush's address on Tuesday and making the sign of the cross. Unfortunately the only reason the world even listens to Hugo is that he happen to be the Dictator of a country that owns a lot of oil. Without the oil, Hugo would be just another Third World Depot yapping at America's heels. Maybe Hugo has rabies, and will have to be put down. Too bad, won’t be sad.

And to round out the best of the best we have the Cowardly Contortionist, Fwench President Jacques Chirac, who twisted at the last second, and ran away from wanting to sanction Iran for it's nuclear program. Ah that Chirac is a whiley one, he can twist and turn on a dime and run away from any hint of confrontation. But I will give him his due, it probably wasn't cowardness that made him turn, it was probably money, just like he took money from Iraq (can you say Oil-For-Food Scandal? I knew you could) to protect them at the Security Council. Never trust a cheese eating surrender monkey like Chirac, because one minute they are your Ally, and the next he is trying to stab you in the back. Bad, Jacques, may your grapes wilt on the vine, and your cheese smell worse that it already does.

It's been a wonderful week here at the UN's Big Tent, the crowd has been predictable (anti-American), the food good and the women subservient. As for the trash we left, let NYC clean it up. Until next time, I spit in your face America!

Kriminal Kofi Annan, King of the World

Monday, September 18, 2006

French-led UNIFIL Unwilling to Disarm Hezbollah

I'm cross posting this from my co-blogger Prophet Muhammad:

My beloved Fighters of Freedom known to infidels as Hizbollah, will be victorious against the Great Satan's ally. For Allah hath shown favor to my fundamentalists in their extermination of Little Satan, and great disdain for the Western infidels; thus the leader of the infidel forces hath no choice but to submit unto His will:

The French general commanding U.N. peacekeeping forces in Lebanon said Monday his troops would not intervene to disarm Hezbollah, even as French President Jacques Chirac said the militant group should not keep a military wing.

Maj. Gen. Alain Pelligrini told reporters the main task of his U.N. force is to ensure southern Lebanon cannot be used as a base for attacks on Israel.

"The disarmament of Hezbollah is not the business of UNIFIL. This is a strictly Lebanese affair, which should be resolved at a national level," he said.Pelligrini's assessment underscored the constraints facing the beefed-up U.N. mission despite a tougher mandate and far greater manpower.
The Western infidels are weak, especially those they call French, and my Islamist Freedom Fighters will not surrender the sword, for it is Allah's will. But even I, Prophet of prophets, understandeth not, the workings of the Great Satan and his allies, for Great Satan and Little Satan delivereth blows to my people, only to then let my people picketh up the sword at a later time.

Allah must have great power over the people of the land of Great Satan and his allies, for the Great Satan and his allies must want to be destroyed by Jihad for their failings in the understanding of Victory.

Sunday, September 17, 2006

United Nations Court threatens Sovereignty

The United States is shooting itself in the foot, giving credence to a monster that has no right to exist in the first place...

The United Nations is a threat to the United States and every one of the citisens of said states. I've presented threats to our rights to property and to raise our children as we please. Here is another power grab and how it threatens the rights of our 50 states...The International Criminal Court. It was made official on 11 April, 2002 at the United Nations headquarters. Former President Clinton signed the treaty on his last day in office.

Any subhuman with half a brain can see where this is going and how it can be abused. But where did it come from and why? As with most encroachments upon freedom today, it supposedly is for the "greater good of humanity." Beforehand, international tribunals were setup to deal with massive human rights abuses like that of the Nazi's in Germany. With constant warfare and international strife, human rights abuses abound these days and some brilliant politician thought it would be a good idea to have a court available at all times. In 1998, the Rome Statute asked for the establishment of something along this line to deal with human rights abuses. The US, China, Israel and Iraq voted against this statue, but it received the 60 ratifications necessary to make it a treaty already.

Oddly enough, rather than object for the appropriate reason...our human rights as protected by out Constitution and how such a court would infringe on the rights of citisens of these United States...objections by US officials are based on fear that politically motivated charges could be brought against Presidents and the military during wars which were not internationally popular.

This is not a treaty among parties in agreement, this is a treaty which seeks to subordinate all nations of the world to the rule of the United Nations. The ICC can act whenever it deems a nation's courts have failed to act, and we already have seen pressure on the Italian justice system to change after the UN affiliated Param Cumaraswamy criticised it. the Italian justice system is lawed and has been for years but you don't treat a local infection with Chemotherapy. Provisions also exist to prosecute injury to a population's "mental health" and appear deliberately vague. Sounds like a way to force international agendas on our school kids to me (and if you can't make the connection I'll be glad to explain it).

One of the most abominable provisions of the the ICC is that it also has the power to bring charges against individuals without the consent of their government. The United Nations would bring charges on behalf of another nation and those charges can be placed against citisens of nations, such as the United States, which have not ratified the treaty. This in effect sets the United Nations as THE world organisation, the one which has the rights to supercede all nation states. It is not just an attack on National Sovereignty, it is an attempt to do away with the concept altogether. The UN has attempted to interfere with our legal system in the past...

Here is what the state dept has said about this treaty and court

As far as I can tell our acting Embassador to the UN, John Bolton is personally against the ICC. If we have to have an ambassidor, it may as well be someone who's against the ICC, right?

The United States has been under international criticism because the Bush administration refused to support this treaty, often characterised as a "Lone Ranger." Bush wants to "stay the course" in Iraq. I hope that he and all other presidents have the gonads to "stay the course" against such abominations as the ICC. Inevitably, though, someone will be tried in abstentia against the will of the United States. I hope that at this time, the appropriate measures are taken (like bombing the ICC).

Thursday, September 14, 2006

Confirm Bolton

As much as many of us would like to see the UN implode and crumble to the ground, we will need a guy in there for the time being that can hold his own.

John Bolton has shown that he can do just that. Unfortunately, he faces an uphill battle in trying to stay there; his appointment expires in January 2007. Bolton will need our support.

John Bolton Phone Bank

UN - A Common Beginning, No More...

Based upon The Tower of Babble, it seems that the UN in its founding had about 40 nations who had fought the Axis Powers in World War II. Most of these nations, not all, were democracies and could be called the Free World or Western Civilization. They seemed to have a common purpose - to nip rouge nations in the bud before they could drag the world into an international war.

The founders of the UN did not seem to be appeasers, having seen the rotten fruits of that sort of wasted labor fraught with meaningless negotiations designed by the threatening nation to give it time to strengthen as well as to enable it to "blackmail" the appeasing nations. "You give me this land, and I'll leave you alone..." This ploy should sound familiar. [Warning to Israel - give not one more inch of land.]

The UN, however, has lost the moral compass and clear-headed purpose it had in its infancy. Over the years it has grown to 192 nations, most of which are authoritarian despotic regimes. Their purpose has devolved into bashing nations that either don't bow down to the anti-free world folks or don't submit their citizens to the rule of the UN.

The UN wants to rule the world through arrogance and to tie free nations up in knots of legalese, international laws, and such. This mode of operation is in direct conflict with the Constitution of the United States (for one). Our Senate has the treaty-making power/function and that cannot be superseded by the whipper-snappers of the UN. They may, however, be very effectual in tieing us up in knots and eroding our individual freedoms. [See Lady Raven's post on the UN and its influence on US laws pertaining to private property ownership.]

The common beginning is no more; Western Civilization is under attack by the Islamic Imperialists aided and abetted by the UN. The UN knows it is ineffectual and dependent upon member states for funding. To end-run that little inconvenience, the UN is trying to codify laws which would enable it to individually tax American citizens. Would they arrest us if we didn't pay? Would Blue Helmets knock at our doors, drag us to international jails?

Americans better get serious about guarding our liberty and we'd better get the US out of the UN - fast.

[If the US leaves, the UN will either fold or the Western nations will re-align, in effect making the UN fold. That would be like a gust of fresh air filling our lungs and renewing our spirit. Wouldn't the breeze of freedom on your face feel good?]
(modified from original post at Conservative Beach Girl)

Tuesday, September 12, 2006

The UN - Morally Bankrupt and Neutered?

I have as yet to begin The Tower of Babble; but there were two articles in The Washington Times about the United Nations and "Coffee-cup" Annan. The articles are respectively: "Americans losing faith in U.N., survey finds"; and an editorial - "U.N. comeback?"

Let's dispense with the second one first. Essentially, the editorial addresses Kofi Annan (How much longer will we have to deal with this master of negotiations?) and his lead in "ending the 34-day Lebanon-Israel war". I seem to have been misinformed. I was under the impression that the war was between Hezbollah and Israel with Lebanon taking no part in the hostilities except of course for staying out of it all. Good planning, that.

The U.N. is ineffectual, held together only by the money of the United States and other Western nations, and has degenerated into a hate-America (and Israel) first club which vies with the American Left to see who can hate America the more vociferously.

To point to the ineffectual and neutered position of the U.N.'s Secretary General, the Supreme Leader of Iran - Ayatollah Ali Khamenei - would not even meet with him. Give Kofi his gold watch, his certificate of accomplishment, and send him off. The sooner the better.

The good news is the first article: Americans losing faith in the U.N..... The subtitle reads: Support grows for cutting world body's U.S. taxpayer funding. Yippee!
"Nearly three-quarters of the American people think the United Nations is no longer effective and could support cutting U.S. contributions to the world body....
The U.N. has degenerated into an America-bashing cliche. And Americans should not be forced to continue to subsidize it with our tax dollars. The U.N. is a hate-filled assemblage concentrating their hatred on the U.S. and Israel.

To make a point, all of the money that the United States government sends around the world, to Africa to fight AIDS; to any nation for any reason is money that American tax payers earned, one dollar at a time. The money comes from the tables of American tax payers. Every dollar that goes to aide of any sort is money that an American family does not have to feed and clothe its children. And so it is with all money that supports the U.N. Some family some place has their standard of living reduced to support the posturers of the U.N.

Back to the issue at hand. Where are the Israelis to go? The State of Israel is a member-state of the United Nations. Many of the members of the U.N. comport themselves like frat boys and girls in verbal slug-fests against nations that will not fight back.

And now, there will be more blue helmets in Lebanon - ensuring the re-arming of Hezbollah? Making southern Lebanon safe for terrorists? Making it impossible for the Israelis to defend themselves when Hezbollah starts lobbing rockets into Israel again? [These remarks are not directed at the nations of Europe who are sending the troops but rather to the use to which these troops will be put.]

The war that has been brought to the West will be fought sooner or later. We should tell the U.N. to step aside, pull the moving vans up to the U.N. loading docks, and move 'em out.

Appeasement has never worked. It will not work now. Eunichs have never held much power; they are used and controlled by more focused powers. No one in a long time has been as vocal and as focused at the Islamic Imperialists. Call the U.N. what it is - a so-so idea whose time has passed due to its own little white-laced handkerchief-wringing approach-avoidance behavior. End it; you can't mend it.

Friday, September 08, 2006

UN Counterterrorism Strategy

According to this AP story, the UN adopted a "counterterrorism strategy," coming no later than 5 years after 9/11. This concocted "strategy" requires nations to follow these intricately detailed and stringent rules:
...nations would be encouraged to give money to U.N. counterterrorism assistance projects. Border controls would be stepped up to prevent terrorists from crossing state lines or smuggling arms such as nuclear weapons.

Nations would vow to do more to exchange information that could be used to fight terrorism and to "take appropriate measures" to make sure that people seeking asylum have not committed terrorist acts or will not use their new status to do so.

The strategy includes a resolution to "make every effort" to come up with a comprehensive convention on international terrorism. Progress on defIning terrorism has been stymied because one country's terrorists can be another's freedom fighters.

And of course, according to UN tradition, hard-line definitive objectives are laid out... clear as day:
...many nations lamented that it does not include a definition or say anything about states that commit terrorist acts.
To summarize, the winning strategy to fight terror lies in these key phrases: encouraged to give money... take appropriate measures... make every effort... no definition... terrorists or freedom fighters... nothing on state-sponsored terrorism...

How do you suppose the UN can have a counter-terrorism strategy when it can't even define terrorism, let alone hurt the feelings of a member state by pointing out the obvious (Syria, Iran), yet never too slow to blame America.

Tuesday, September 05, 2006

Kofi - The Great Negotiator - The Fix is in!

Hopefully, the Israeli soldiers will be returned to their loved ones safely.

But don't you wonder about the Kofi, his time as Grand Boo Bah of the UN about to expire! [Applauds here]

To go out with a grand accomplishment. The fix is in; Hezbollah will win; and the good, patient Israelis will once again be forced to take it on the chin...

Thank you, United Nations where some nations are more equal than others.

The UN couldn't give the befuddled Jimmy Carter (my fingers rebel just to type the name) a win when Iran held US citizens for 400 + days, but the fix is in for Iran and their surrogates the Hezbos.

The Israelis will only have peace for themselves when they beat the folks who want to drive them into the sea decisively with no doubt in anyone's mind.

The UN will shudder and recoil at the behavior of the Israelis. But the dust will settle and we can all go back to paying tribute to the mighty UN.

The time and place of the release of the Israeli soldiers is in the hands of God, let no power-corrupted hack with frequent flyer miles think otherwise.

Monday, September 04, 2006

UN Influences in US Land Use

I'm a firm believer in the founding documents of the United States, and therefore I'm a firm advocate for either the dissolution of the UN, or failing that a US withdrawal from it. The goals of the UN are set fundamentally against the freedoms held sacred by these United States and our way of life. The influence of the global organisation would explain many abuses of liberty, one of which is those relating to property rights which are being stripped by the courts and have been eroding for quite a while.

I'm sure you'd wonder why I believe the UN is responsible for the deterioration of liberties in the US. I don't believe that it is solely responsible, that would be stating way too much. But I do believe that it is a contributing factor...and a major influence in the effort to strip US citisens of their rights. If you look closely at resolutions and conventions held by the UN and then looked at public policy in the United States, it will make you sick.

The UN started making noises which sounded much like socialim or communism way back in the 1970s. It's official policy was laid out in The United Nations Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat 1). The preamble to Item 10 reads:
"Land...cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes. The provision of decent dwellings and healthy conditions for the people can only be achieved if land is used in the interests of society as a whole. Public control of land use is therefore indispensable...."
Recommendations endorsed by this document for member nations include:

* Population distribution (a1)
* Public Ownership and Survellance of the Land (d1) (to ensure environmental safety and equitable distribution of benefits)
* The use of zoning, the creation of land reserves, and legal controls to control the use of land (d2)
* Controlling the profits and wealth derived from land via methods including "recapture" (d3)
* Public control of "development rights" of land (d5)

The Federal Land Use Planning Act, which would have codified these ideas in US law, did not pass Congress in the 1970s. But this did not mean that the influence was silenced...NGOs such as the Sierra Club and Planned Parenthood lobbied for these policies at all levels and there were successes. Florida and Oregon stepped in time right away, many other states were less than thrilled and thus it took a wee bit more to get the whole of the US to follow the party line.

The UN therefore changed it's strategy to a non direct approach and began collaborating with the IUCN, The WRI and the World Wide Fund for Nature (who would dare stand against the little animals?) and focused attention on biodiversity and global warming propaganda. We had the UN Conference on Environment and Development in 1992 which produced the same plan of action as the 1976 paper, but it was a tad more palletable for sheep to swallow.
"Land is normally defined as a physical entity in terms of its topography and spatial nature; a broader integrative view also includes natural resources: the solid, minerals, water and biota that the land comprises. Expanding human requirements and economic activities are placing ever increasing pressures on land resources, creating competition and conflicts and resulting in suboptimal use of both land and land resources. It is now essential to resolve these conflicts and move towards more effective and efficient use of land and its natural resources. Opportunities to allocate land to different uses arise in the course of major settlement or development projects or in a sequential fashion as land becomes available on the market. This provides assign protected status for conservation of biological diversity or critical ecological services." (Section 2, chapter 10, pg 84)
Between 1976 and 1992 strategies for controlling land and how it is used were refined to be subtle, and therefore were much more successful. It sounds palletable to even those who believe in local government control of things...Policy concerning land use was to be made at "the lowest level of public authority consistent with effective action and a locally driven approach." This does not mean elected officials, it means "stakeholder councils" or other bodies of "civil society" (ie lackeys of the UN and NGOs).

The US Constitution and our founders believed that the individual has the right to determine the use of his land and to reap the benefits of that use if it is profitable. It's a fundamental right given by God and protected by the government, supposedly. In opposition to that, the UN does not believe that the land owner has the right to say how his land is used. He has to justify that use and it has to be for the "common good" as percieved by some globalist agenda. This is why I originally stated that the goals of the UN were diametrically opposed to our inalienable rights and therefore we need to either get rid of the UN or leave it to the rest of the globalists to fight over.

Unfortunately citisens of these United States have no clue that their land rights are being eroded and controlled by a United Nations agenda which seeks to control the way land is used all over the world. To most, the UN is a food and aid distributer which periodically and ineptly attempts to keep the peace between warring nations and costs too much money. If people would only see the UN for what it is...a monster greedy for control over our lives, our land and...well...everything. And we thought the USSR was a threat....

Lady Raven

Of course if you think I'm just blowing smoke out my arse, investigate this yourself. You can view the Quotes cited in this rant in the following documents "Report of Habitat: United Nations Conference on Human Settlements" Vancouver, 31 May-11 Jun 1976...and "Agenda 21: The United Nations Programme of Action from Rio" You can get information on how to obtain copies of said documents from the UN, Ny NY 10017. You may also wish to check out "The Global Biodiversity Assessment" Cambridge University Press, ISBN No. 564316..."Sustainable America: A New Consensus" US GPO; Mail Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-9328, ISBN No. 0-16-048529-0.

The UN Parlay - Buying time for Enemies of Free World

As difficult as it is to watch the parlay (as used by Johnny Depp for negotiations in Pirates of the Caribbean) as performed by the UN, the parlay does serve several purposes. Aside from the funny spectacle of the Secretary General walking around with egg on his face as recently as two days ago after having met with Mad Jad of Iran, the parlay buys time for the Axis of Evil and also provides unlimited excuses for eventual action by the West.

First, the Islamists have learned that Western leaders and the Secretary General of the UN take the parlay very seriously. They are greeted with the trappings of power, prestige, and pomp. And words, words, words.

As Mad Jad postures and as the Islamist leaders congratulate themselves for tieing the UN, and of course the West, in knots and for Hezbollah's aggression against Israel, the West uses the parlay too.

History shows that when any so-named Axis of Evil flexes its muscles, the West will retaliate and exclaim, "But, we tried the parlay."

All the while, the self-styled mavens of the UN knit like so many Madame LaFarges(sp) at the steps of the guillotine as Islamists make fools of them all. Nations of Western Civilization must set aside differences - real or imagined - and bind themselves together in defense of the West.

There is no shame in Western Civilization. We ended slavery. It survives today in North Africa. We advanced medicine to eradicate diseases that are making a resurgence among our citizens, the diseasess being brought from the Third World through our open border, suicide policies. The list of Western accomplishments goes on.

The parlay, the so-called de-escalation of hostilities is appeasement while the enemies of Israel and the West regroup and re-arm. But, parlay, parlay on dilettantes of the UN. When finally backed against the wall, the West will at last defend itself. The defense may not be pretty. There are just so many dinners a person can pay for with no results to show for it before he gets miffed.

As for the UN, we need results there or it's time to end it, not mend it. Failing that, the West needs to use the UN to its own purposes and to understand a major tenent of Islamists - "lie to the infidel, lie to the infidel, lie to the infidel." Shame on Kofi for believing one word Mad Jad says.

When the West fully understands the Islamist tenent - lie to the infidel - then the West can come from a position of strength, can do a bit of lying on their own, and use the UN for a change.

Friday, September 01, 2006

Give Me a Friggin' Break! The UN Lets the Fox Watch The Henhouse!!

I said I couldn't be surprized by some of the idiocy that comes out of the UN, but Kofi Annan's latest move, does astound me. Good ol' terrorist loving Kofi has said that the UN will let Syria enforce the arms embargo on the Hezbollah.
Kofi Annan, the UN secretary-general, said today that Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian president, had promised to enforce an arms embargo on Hizbollah under a UN resolution that halted Israel's war with the Lebanese group.

"The president informed me that Syria supports the Security Council Resolution 1701 and will help in its implementation," Annan told reporters after talks with Assad in Damascus.

"While stating Syrian objections to the presence of foreign forces along the Syrian-Lebanese border, the president committed to me that Syria will take all necessary measures to implement in full paragraph 15 of the resolution," Annan added, referring to a provision that bans illegal arms shipments to Lebanon.

Syria funnels arms to the Hezzies and Kofi instead of putting UN "Peacekeeper" on the border to prevent Syria from smuggling those arms, allows Syria to enforce the embargo. Can he get any stupider? Yes, Syria objected to the troops on the Syrian border, because they want to restock the Hezzies, that doesn't mean you should back down and take Assad's word that he will enforce the embargo. Israel might as well gear up for another war, because with the UN in southern Lebanon, the Hezzies are just going to re-arm and come back at them. Kofi is not only incompetent, he is a danger to world peace.

Mr Minority

UN Resolution - 1701

On August 12, 2006, having no paint to watch dry, I chose to watch the UN fifteen member council talk about their respective positions regarding their vote to stop the fighting between Israel and Hizbollah in Lebanon. The Ambassador from Israel was allowd to sit at the left tip of the horseshoe table, while the Lebanese Minister took the seat on the right.

The effort was like watching grass grow in a draught but I persevered. It was no surprise to me but still and all rather shocking to hear so many of the nations' ministers condemn Israel. Greece really surprised me.

In a quick review, I found 7 UN Resolutions on Lebanon going back to 1978 through 2006. The eighth one is 1701 agreed to Aug, 12, 2006. In point of fact, these resolutions have no teeth and they are not designed to have any teeth to protect the Israeli people.

One aspect of 1701 calls for Israel and Lebanon to support a permanent cease-fire (recall Israel and Lebanon were not fighting each other) and a long-term solution based on the following principles and arrangements, including establishment between Blue Line and Litani River of an area free of any armed personnel, assets and weapons other than those of the government of Lebanon and of UNIFIL as authorized...(all well and good so far foreign forces in Lebanon without consent of its government, right? Problem there is that many in Hezbollah are considered Lebanese. Does that create a problem?

I take that to read that the guns, weapons, Hezbollah forces can stay if wanted by Lebanon.

I have heard the statements of Kofi Annan. To me he seems anti-Israel. There were no or few words about rebuilding the destroyed homes and buildings in Israel. The following is included because it is the best I can find at the moment on the expectations that UN troops are indeed expected to engage in de-arming militant factions in Lebanon.

(AGI) - Pristina (Kosovo), Sept.1 - "Resolution 1701 clearly states that UN troops must help the Lebanese armed forces to make sure that no other weapons be present in southern Lebanon other than those of the Lebanese and UNIFIL troops. Consequently, within this framework, UN troops must intervene, jointly with Lebanese forces, to prevent that this happens, and possibly take possession of these weapons", said Italian Chief of Defence Staff, Admiral Giampaolo Di Paola, who added that UN troops must dialogue with all members of the Lebanese people, including the Hezbollah. The landing will begin tomorrow, and last two days: about 1000 troops will land. The 2,500-people contingent will be operational in 60-70 days, namely, the end of October. (AGI) -
011945 SET 06"

Based on the past efforts of the UN, I would not hold out success for Israel. The UN has an anti-Semite agenda and sits at cross purposes with a secure Israel in the Middle East. We must keep an eye out on this issue and share information as quickly as we get it regarding the non-enforcement of 1701. We know the earlier 7 resolutions weren't enforced.

Our eyes are open, we are on the case, and we are a small band of brothers and sisters.

For my part over the years I have seen little good come from the UN unless it is the distribution of food from free-world nations unapproprately repackaged in UN stamped bags and boxes.

If there is any good to come from the UN, perhaps our combined efforts can have a say in the matter.

Open Post

On an open trackback post against UN (in Italian). Feel free to trackback your post to let Italian readers know how usefull cuold be to Screw the UN.

Enjoy your Life