Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘United Nations’

UN to push religious communities to ‘fully comply’ with human rights law to ’empower’ LGBT+ people

CANDACE HATHAWAY | February 06, 2023

**Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images**

The United Nations announced plans to release a report in June regarding “perceived contradictions” between “the right to freedom of religion or belief (FoRB)” and “sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI).” The report aims to push governments to “fully comply” with international human rights law to “protect and empower” the participation of LGBT+ people in religious communities, the Daily Caller News Foundation reported.

Sounds like more “One World Government” push.

The U.N. requested calls for input from all interested governments, religious leaders, academics, activists, and human rights organizations regarding “perceived points of tension” between FoRB and SOGI. Respondents were requested to indicate any policies or laws protecting discriminatory religious practices.

One question asked, “What are the key trends or significant instances of discriminatory or abusive practices by individual providers of goods or services in the public sphere against LGBT+ and gender-diverse persons that rely on religious narratives?”

The report’s findings will be shared during the 53rd session of the U.N. Human Rights Council in June. It will also include “recommendations to States and other relevant stakeholders to fully comply with their obligations under international human rights law to protect and empower LGBT+ persons to pursue happiness, exercise and enjoy all their human rights, and choose how to contribute to society on an equal footing with everyone, including through effective participation in religious, cultural, social, and public life.” In charge of the report is Victor Madrigal-Borloz, an independent expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, who has been a longtime LGBT+ advocate.

The U.N.’s announcement argued that religion has “historically been used to promote, enable, and condone institutional and personal violence and discrimination against individuals based on sexual orientation or gender identity (real or presumed); repress sexual and gender diversity; and promote cis-gendered and heteronormative norms of sexual orientation and gender identity.”

According to the U.N., such practices cannot be “justified” under human rights law. The upcoming report aims to “introduce voices from LGBT-inclusive belief systems” to “better recognize and protect LGBT+ persons’ access to faith and spirituality.”

Grace Melton, senior associate in the Richard and Helen DeVos Center for Life, Religion, and Family at Heritage, told the DCNF that the report could result in the “politicization” of religious freedom.

“My biggest concern is the premise of the report which seems to suggest that freedom of religion and rights based on sexual orientation are the same,” stated Melton. “But certainly as a function of international law, they are not the same. Freedom of religion or belief, or freedom of conscience, is an internationally protected human right. It’s codified in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which is a legally binding treaty.”

Andrea Picciotti-Bayer, a fellow for the Institute for Human Ecology at the Catholic University of America, told the DCNF that the U.N.’s report is a “bold attack” against religious freedom.

“Despite saying that we shouldn’t have these rights pitted against one another, but when you keep reading on you see that the author of the report really does see [rights and religion] as being in conflict,” Picciotti-Bayer said.

“This narrative is not only harmful because it could make people doubt the importance of religion in their own lives and their communities, but it’s also harmful because it will undermine really important social protection,” Picciotti-Bayer added. “Religion and religious freedom is a stabilizing presence, and for the cases where religion is being misused to oppress, the answer isn’t to shut down religion entirely.”

Neither the U.N. nor Madrigal-Borloz responded to a request for comment, the DCNF reported.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

UN Program Teaching Kids ‘Social and Emotional Learning’ Actually Seeks to Kill Their Individualism

BY: KIMBERLY ELLS | AUGUST 23, 2022

KIMBERLY ELLS

School districts around the world are racing to implement Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) programs in the name of improving their students’ social and emotional skills. In fact, according to the global purveyor of SEL standards, 27 states so far have adopted K-12 SEL competencies, and all 50 states have adopted SEL competencies for pre-K students. But where is this massive push for SEL coming from, and what are the motives behind it?

The answer to this question is becoming clear: The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) is a primary force behind the SEL movement worldwide. A major way UNESCO advocates for SEL is through UNESCO’S Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Education for Peace and Sustainable Development. The Gandhi Institute produces an online publication called The Blue Dot, which features articles from SEL experts and others around the globe that highlight “the relationship between education, peace, sustainable development and global citizenship.” Invoking Gandhi’s name in the title of this United Nations entity is meant to pull at the heartstrings of anyone who hears it. But should our heartstrings be pulled?

SEL Is Key to Achieving the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals

The title of a feature article in The Blue Dot co-written by a specialist from the Gandhi Institute reveals why UNESCO is hellbent on getting SEL into every school in America and across the world: “SEL for SDGs: Why Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) is Necessary to Achieve the Sustainable Development Goals.” The “sustainable development goals” (SDGs) are noble-sounding goals that would essentially require government management of energy sources worldwide and the large-scale redistribution of wealth in the name of saving the planet. In UNESCO’s view, the endgame of SEL is not to meet the social and emotional needs of each child, but to shape all children to meet the needs of a global society by adhering to the sustainable development goals.

The article explains that the UN’s sustainable development goals will create “dissonance” in people due to the conflicting nature of some of the goals. The goals will also create dissonance in people because of the monumental sacrifices that may be necessary to achieve them — giving up fossil fuels, family values, and control of one’s own property, to name a few.

Therefore, proponents say it is necessary to reduce children’s emotional resistance to the goals through systemic SEL in the classroom: “Since dissonance is an unpleasant emotive state, subjects of dissonance require emotion-regulatory capabilities (emotional resilience) to navigate the behaviors and prerequisite antecedents to attain [the] SDGs.” The article says, “Dissonance can be caused by beliefs, attitudes, values, and feelings,” and that “interventions to reduce dissonance are required to address … the intensity of emotional response.”

In short, they believe interventions by way of SEL programs are necessary to influence young people’s “beliefs, attitudes, values, and feelings” so they will more readily think like global citizens and cooperate with the goals UNESCO has set for the world.

Another article in The Blue Dot titled, “What is Systemic Social and Emotional Learning and Why Does it Matter?” and written by two officers from the Collaborative for Academic, Social and Emotional Learning (CASEL), says CASEL’s mission is to help make “SEL an essential part of the preschool to high school education.” CASEL has positioned itself as the world leader on SEL standards and has a cooperative relationship with UNESCO. These two entities are united in their zeal to weave SEL into all school subjects and to deliver it to all children everywhere.

Raising the Next Generation of ‘Global Citizens’

But why? What is it UNESCO wants to instill in children? UNESCO’s materials make it clear that SEL is intended to foster not only kindness between students, but cooperation with a global agenda rooted in the doctrine of collectivism. Nandini Chatterjee Singh, a program specialist for the Gandhi Institute, says “SEL skills are powerful competencies” that have been shown to “instill pluralistic thinking.” The institute’s website further says it is seeking to teach children to “exhibit prosocial behavior for … a peaceful and sustainable planet.”

In short, proponents of the sustainable development goals and SEL want to instill “pluralistic thinking” in your child in the name of global peace. They want children to be taught to value the “collective good” over individual liberties, rights, and property despite the fact that the freest, most prosperous nations in the world are founded on individual liberties, rights, and property.

Richard Davidson, a writer in The Blue Dot, says UNESCO’s Gandhi Institute is poised to disseminate SEL programs “that will have the potential to influence the development of the next generation of global citizens,” and he declares, “I believe that today we have a moral obligation to incorporate SEL into our educational systems at all levels.” Similarly, CASEL says, “SEL at the classroom level needs to be embedded in coordinated, systemic, whole-child, school-wide approaches.” (For more on whole-child, whole-school approaches to education, see here.)

In another SEL article in The Blue Dot, Mahima Bhalla, learning coordinator for the Gandhi Institute, says that “in order to contribute to the goal of peaceful and sustainable societies,” his organization “recognizes the need to move beyond only academic purposes of education” and instead focus on influencing the social and emotional state of students. This indicates a clear sea change in the purpose of education.

Systemic SEL Digital Curriculum

According to Davidson, the Gandhi Institute’s digital platforms “show great promise for massive scaling” and the director of the Gandhi Institute says it has already disseminated a suite of interactive digital SEL modules that address “contemporary issues such as migration, nationalism and violence.” The scope of these digital modules appears to go well beyond teaching Johnny and Billy to get along on the playground, which is how SEL is often sold to local educators.

The intended reach of the Gandhi Institute’s advocacy is made clear in its “Recommendations to Implementing SEL” section where it says the recommendations the institute gives are “prescribed as general guidelines for education decision makers at the national level right down to school boards and schools.” It’s also telling that it notes, “There needs to be an intentional focus (such as a campaign) organized by a coalition of partners led by UNESCO to communicate a common and unified message on the importance of SEL to parents and the public at large.”

By their own admission, UNESCO and its partners are eagerly trying to sell the idea of systemic SEL to the stakeholders known as parents. So are the parents of the world lining up to demand that schools add integrated SEL programs to their children’s school curricula? No. SEL is being peddled by UNESCO from the top down under the guise of local control.

Developing the attributes of compassion, kindness, and empathy in children is a noble goal, and some of that development can appropriately happen at school. But infusing digitally connected, UNESCO-endorsed, systemic SEL curriculum into the classrooms of the world to instill pluralistic thinking in children is not the answer. Local programs, local communities, and individual families are the best ways to instill social and emotional skills in children and to maintain free societies based on individual rights and responsibilities.

Kimberly Ells is a writer, mother, and policy advisor for Family Watch International. Her book, “The Invincible Family: Why the Global Campaign to Crush Motherhood and Fatherhood Can’t Win,” documents the global children’s sexual rights movement. Go to StopCSE.org to learn more about children’s sexual rights and comprehensive sexuality education.

Category:

Education, Family, Political

Tagged with:

United Nations Grantee Uses U.S. Tax Dollars To Fund Illegal Immigration

Reported By Todd Bensman | DECEMBER 16, 2021

**Photo © Tomas Castelazo, www.tomascastelazo.com / Wikimedia Commons / CC BY-SA 4.0**

AUSTIN, Texas – During a recent trip to a Reynosa, Mexico migrant camp, I took photos of a United Nations-supported International Organization for Migration (IOM) operation to hand out cash debit cards to intending and repeat border crossers. One of two workers at a plastic folding table inside the Reynosa camp, which was filled to capacity with at least 1,200 mostly U.S.-expelled Central Americans, said they were distributing the cards for IOM to help migrants waiting until they cross the Rio Grande at greater leisure to claim asylum, for which most will be declared ineligible years later. Many parents, for instance, got about $400 every 15 days, I was told, or $800 a month if they were still there to collect it, although the support level varied.

My photos of this posted to Twitter and related dispatch for the Center for Immigration Studies drew outrage among some Republican lawmakers. They saw the images as evidence that the U.S. taxpayer-funded IOM was providing material support to an ongoing mass migration harmful to America’s national interest.

A couple of weeks later, Texas Rep. Lance Gooden, R-Texas, and 11 other House Republican co-sponsors introduced the “No Tax Dollars for the United Nations Immigration Invasion Act” bill. It would prohibit the $3.8 billion in contributions currently proposed in the White House 2022 budget to the IOM and other UN-supported organizations. A Daily Caller story that broke news of the bill’s introduction quoted Gooden citing my Reynosa photos.

When I took the photos, I wasn’t exactly sure of exactly what I was seeing in Reynosa. But here’s what I have learned since: The money card is confirmed beyond doubt, but also “hard cash in envelopes” and “movement assistance”; and an online IOM “Emergency Manual” describes what I saw as part of a program it terms “Cash-Based Interventions,” or CBIs.

A plastic IOM cash card given to an aspiring border-crossing migrant in Reynosa, Mexico on November 20. Photo by Todd Bensman.

Paying People Who Illegally Enter the United States

So, for starters, country-specific IOM “Cash Working Groups” are indeed coordinating the handouts of the cash-holding plastic cards I saw (referred to as prepaid debit cards, e-wallets and e-cards) to intending U.S. border crossers in Reynosa, Mexico. But it turns out that is just an iceberg tip. The IOM is handing out cash and other material support to intending illegal border crossers in as many as 100 other shelters it helped build, expand, or supports from Central America north. Some form of this has been around for years, but starting with a mass-migration event and Trump’s “Remain in Mexico” policy in 2019, the IOM supercharged the program and “institutionalized” it. This doubled the countries where it is used in 2020 and increased by 77 percent the number of recipients to 1.6 million worldwide, according to an annual 2020 IOM report. That would include Mexico.

The IOM Emergency Manual document says this cash assistance also includes less-seeable bank transfers, mobile transfers, and e-vouchers that go to intending illegal border crossers en route or at least temporarily blocked like many of those I saw and interviewed in Reynosa. In addition to those and the pre-paid plastic cards, the IOM says in its Emergency Manual that it also sometimes hands out “cash in envelopes (hard cash).” No details are offered on that. Many payments are given as “unconditional; unrestricted cash transfers” for “multi-purpose use,” the manual says. Still other handouts subsidize the lodging, rent, and utilities of intending border crossers for “safe tenure, to reduce the risk of forced eviction.”

Start Tapping U.S. Taxpayers Before You Get There

Then there is “movement assistance” in the form of conditional or unrestricted cash transfers. The IOM describes this money as providing transportation access after, say a camp is closed, but also simply “to sites and other situations related to onward movement of population.”

To border hawks, all of this looks, feels, and acts like an agency providing the means for illegal border crossings. The IOM’s own stated purpose for cash-based interventions would only reinforce the perception: the money is intended to “restore feelings of choice and empowerment for beneficiaries.”

Migrant advocates defend cash support to aspiring illegal border crossers as a means to prevent death and suffering among populations they believe have no choice but to migrate and would whether or not any UN agency helps out. But the legitimate flip side of that claim is that cash in envelopes or in e-wallets—filled in part by U.S. taxpayer money—can also be said to enable, sustain, or even entice many driven not by urgent dangers but by a desire for better jobs amid reports that Americans would let them in.

Spending U.S. Money to Encourage ‘Invasion’

An aggravating irony among the fast-expanding coterie of Republican congressional critics of the UN largesse is that U.S. taxpayer money is being spent in contravention of American immigration law and national interest in controlling the border against economic migration.

“All of this sounds like they’re using U.S. tax dollars to encourage this invasion into the nation, and it seems strange to me that we would support an organization that encourages and funds this,” Gooden told me. “It’s totally crazy. I am baffled that there’s not more outrage, but I think the lack of outrage is due to the lack of knowledge.”

While it may be true that IOM money relieves the suffering of intending border crossers, it is just as arguably true that it creates financial breathing room they need to prepare for more opportune crossing moments. The money enables that highly desired payoff, rather than a forced trip home for lack of funds after, say, an expensive smuggling journey that ended with U.S. expulsion. Those ones arrive in villages with a deterring don’t-try-this message to friends and neighbors.

Regarding the importance of such messaging in the development of mass migration crises, I’ve never met one who didn’t carry a cell phone connected to Internet social media. In interviews with perhaps hundreds of migrants in Mexico and beyond, I learned that this live-time social media grapevine constantly sings with news from the trail upstream that directly informs decisions downstream as to whether to launch north or remain in place. So when word of these IOM cash, lodging, and transportation benefits spreads via social media to hometowns, friends and relatives undoubtedly feel more emboldened to invest smuggling money for their own journeys to UN waystations. Because of all this, monthly IOM cash for food, lodging, and “movement” assistance amounts to material support for illegal immigration. It influences decisions to cross.

Increasing U.S. Cash Support for Illegal Immigration

It’s unclear just how much the United States gives IOM to sustain intending border crossers until they succeed, or how many got some during 2021. But the cash giveaways have been on a steep skyward trajectory since 2019 and only show signs of continuing upward.

The public reporting as to how much the United States, through the State Department, gives IOM and how many got it is opaque at best. President Joe Biden’s 2022 budget calls for $10 billion in humanitarian assistance “to support vulnerable people abroad.” But there’s no detailed breakout.

A Fiscal Year 2019 summary (starting page 37) by the State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM), which provides U.S. funding to the IOM and many other United Nations agencies, offers one clue of the pre-expansion levels. IOM spent more than $60 million in 2019 for activities in the northern part of South America, Central America, and Mexico during the so-called “caravan migrant crisis” earlier that year, the fiscal year report said.

State Department-funneled money helped IOM provide 29,000 people in the Western Hemisphere with cash and voucher assistance and supported 75 shelter waystations, the State Department report states on page 42, much like the one I visited in Reynosa. Along the northern border of Mexico in July 2019, at the height of a “caravan” crisis, the IOM provided 600 beds and essential items to the Mexican government and helped it expand existing shelters and build new ones to accommodate the “asylum seekers.”

This came as a response to the Trump administration’s “Remain in Mexico” turn-back policy. That deported economic migrants trying to abuse the asylum system, while others chose to wait for Democrats to take the White House in November 2020—a sound bet, it turned out.

The IOM decided to increase the size and scope of the program after 2019, even after President Biden took office and ended Trump’s “Remain in Mexico” policy. The extent is unclear, but the IOM institutionalized cash handout programs in Panama, El Salvador, and Mexico in 2020. Ambiguously, the IOM’s annual 2020 report on the program showed only that it gave cash to somewhere between 10,000 and 100,000 people in Mexico that year.

Whatever the recipient numbers since 2019, the IOM clearly intends an upward trajectory for the cash giveaways. The IOM’s Emergency Manual stated several times it would do so in alignment with a fairly recent pact among an international consortium of organizations known as The Grand Bargain, of which the IOM is a signatory. The Grand Bargain pact dates to 2016.

An Inter-Agency Standing Committee Grand Bargain website reports that number 3 on the objectives list is “Increase the use and coordination of cash-based programming.” A November 26, 2021 Grand Bargain caucus on cash coordination had all principals agree to increase the use of cash “beyond current low levels” through the use of even more means of delivery.

The section’s first line starts out using familiar language seen in the IOM’s Emergency Manual: “Using cash helps deliver greater choice and empowerment to affected people…”

Here’s the problem: with the greater choice and empowerment that IOM money can buy, aspiring migrants are able to remain within striking distance of the southern border to choose the time of their inevitable illegal border crossings. No one should wonder why border hawks hate this system and open borders advocates love it.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

REPORT: US Cash Is Being Airlifted Into Afghanistan

Reported by VARUN HUKERI | GENERAL ASSIGNMENT & ANALYSIS REPORTER | October 07, 2021

Afghan Refugees Desperate for Food and Aid — (Photo by Paula Bronstein/Getty Images)

U.S. and international officials are preparing to airlift U.S. cash into Afghanistan for humanitarian assistance while “denying assets” for the Taliban government and its leaders, according to Reuters. Emergency funding for Afghanistan, aimed at preventing a humanitarian crisis amid food shortages and political upheaval, would see U.S. cash flown into Kabul for distribution through banks, Reuters reported. Officials reportedly plan to send $200 in direct cash to Afghans without involving the Taliban.

The U.S. and Europe have reportedly discussed creating an international trust fund to bypass the Taliban government and fund local services. International groups such as the World Food Program and the United Nations are also considering flying in U.S. cash, officials said, according to Reuters.

A U.S. Treasury official said the department would allow humanitarian assistance through international and non-governmental organizations, Reuters reported.

On the international level, one approach could see the World Food Program airlift U.S. dollars and distribute them to people to purchase essentials such as food. A second approach could see the U.N. send cash currently held in banks, according to internal policy documents obtained by Reuters.

The Taliban takeover of Afghanistan and departure of U.S. troops has led foreign donors and investors to pull billions from the country.

The International Monetary Fund suspended Afghanistan’s access to its resources, including $460 million in emergency reserves on Aug. 18. The World Bank halted aid to Afghanistan one week later due to concerns about “development prospects, especially for women,” the BBC reported.

The U.S. also froze billions of dollars in assets from accounts held in Afghanistan’s central bank, a Biden administration official told Axios. The move has prevented the Taliban government from accessing an estimated $9.4 billion in international reserves.

Around 75% of public spending in Afghanistan had been financed by foreign grants prior to the Taliban takeover, according to the World Bank. International groups warn that 14 million Afghans are facing hunger and the country’s economy could collapse amid a major cash shortage.

“If the country collapses, we will all pay the consequences,” a senior European Union official said, according to Reuters. “No one wants to rush into a recognition of the Taliban, but we need to deal with them. The question is not if … but how.”

Category:

International Politics

Tagged with:

Star-Studded ‘One World’ Benefit Concert for the W.H.O. Sparks Outrage: ‘Commie Propaganda’

Reported by BEN KEW | 19 Apr 2020

URL of the originating web site: https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2020/04/19/star-studded-one-world-benefit-concert-for-the-w-h-o-sparks-outrage-commie-propaganda/

LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA – NOVEMBER 24: Taylor Swift performs onstage during the 2019 American Music Awards at Microsoft Theater on November 24, 2019 in Los Angeles, California. (Photo by JC Olivera/Getty Images)

Critics of the World Health Organization (W.H.O.) expressed anger over Saturday’s star-studded “One World” benefit concert held to raise funds for the U.N. body after President Donald Trump pulled funding for the organization over its connections to the Chinese communist regime.

The “One World” concert, led by the W.H.O. and non-profit group Global Citizen, was broadcast across multiple television channels in the U.S. and around the world on Saturday, with the aim of raising money for the W.H.O.’s COVID-19 Solidarity Response Fund.

The line-up of stars for the event included Taylor Swift, Paul McCartney, The Rolling Stones, Beyonce, Oprah Winfrey, Jennifer Lopez, Elton John, and Lady Gaga, who even described W.H.O. Director-General Tedros Adhanom as a “superstar.”

The concert also attracted contributions from political figures such as former first ladies Michelle Obama and Laura Bush, as well as celebrity supporters of the cause including former soccer star David Beckham and Microsoft founder Bill Gates.

However, many people were left unimpressed by the event, denouncing the organization’s handling of the Chinese coronavirus pandemic and describing it as a form of globalist propaganda.

“If I could give No stars I would,” one Amazon reviewer wrote. “WHO lied! People died!! Let’s not forgot this!!! While we’re home given up our freedom and most of us without jobs these CELEBRITIES ask us to help raise money for the WHO?! Forget it!”

“Yes, we need useless celebrities preaching to us how this isn’t China’s fault and how we should just all live as one nation,” added another.

Skeptics also lashed out on Twitter against W.H.O. chief Dr. Tedros Adhanom, a former official in Ethiopia’s Marxist Tigray People’s Liberation Front, who has been the subject of widespread criticism for his attempts to downplay China’s role in the outbreak.

Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus

✔@DrTedros

· Apr 18, 2020

Replying to @DrTedros

One World: together at home. Thank you to all our frontline heath workers.

Roberto@rmtiberti1

Disgrace, you have no ground to stand on after this episode. Failed to signal what was coming out of failed to confirm a pandemic until it was too late, you were behind the curve permanently

181

5:53 PM – Apr 18, 2020

Twitter Ads info and privacy

42 people are talking about this

Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus

✔@DrTedros

· Apr 18, 2020

Replying to @DrTedros

One World: together at home. Thank you to all our frontline heath workers.

odere benji@BenjiOdere

This would be a wonderful message if Tedros had performed in the initial stages of the fight. He should apologise to the world, otherwise, atulekemu!

46

11:16 PM – Apr 18, 2020

Twitter Ads info and privacy

See odere benji’s other Tweets

The concert also took place after President Donald Trump pledged to withdraw funding from the W.H.O., citing its connections to China and fatal decision to oppose travel restrictions during the virus’s onset.

“Today I’m instructing my administration to halt funding of the World Health Organization while a review is conducted to assess the World Health Organization’s role in severely mismanaging and covering up the spread of the coronavirus,” Trump said at a White House press conference Tuesday.

“The WHO’s attack on travel restrictions put political correctness above life-saving measures,” he continued. “The reality is that the WHO failed to adequately obtain, vet and share information in a timely and transparent fashion. Fortunately, I was not convinced and suspended travel from China saving untold numbers of lives.”

Follow Ben Kew on Facebook, Twitter at @ben_kew, or email him at bkew@breitbart.com.

Category:

Health, International Politics, Political

Tagged with:

Nikki Haley Announces Punishment For UN Members That Voted Against Jerusalem Move

Reported by Benny Johnson | Reporter At Large | 4:48 PM 01/02/2018

URL of the original posting site: http://dailycaller.com/2018/01/02/nikki-haley-announces-punishment-for-un-members-that-voted-against-jerusalem-move/

Ambassador Nikki Haley said Tuesday that the U.S. is taking its first move to punish the countries that opposed moving its embassy in Israel to Jerusalem. Those countries, it seems, will not be invited to a party America is throwing.

“As I said in December, we won’t forget the Jerusalem vote,” Haley, U.S. ambassador to the U.N., said. “To that end, tomorrow night, we are having a reception for the countries who chose not to oppose the U.S. position. This is a great sign of U.S. friendship, and I look forward to tomorrow evening. We hope to see more of this in 2018.”

“The United States is asked to do a huge amount around the world, and we are happy to do that. But we expect to be treated respectfully in return.”

President Donald Trump said that the countries who don’t vote with the U.S. at risk of having their U.S. aid cut. Were Trump to follow through on his threat, Daily Caller research found that the U.S. would save more than $24 billion.

But for now, no cocktails for you.

The decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel sparked international backlash against America, and a referendum condemning the move was put forward at the United Nations. In response, Haley said that the United States would not forget the countries that “disrespected” America. When the final vote came down, 128 countries voted in opposition to the U.S. Embassy move to Jerusalem.

Category:

International Politics

Tagged with:

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoons

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

More Politically INCORRECT Cartoons

Category:

Political, Spiritual

Tagged with:

More Politically INCORRECT Cartoons

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Donald Trump’s new Congress looks to STOP funding UN in ‘herculean’ leap

January 6, 2017 By Kirsty Jane

URL of the original posting site: http://eheadlines.com/donald-trumps-new-congress-looks-to-stop-funding-un-in-herculean-leap/

The House Freedom Caucus, a group of conservative congressmen, are due to meet next week to decide between two possible proposals for the new law.

From Express

One possible course of action is to reduce United States’ funding of the UN while the other would make funding voluntary with a mandate that any contributions must be agreed by the House every two years. Congressman for North Carolina Mark Meadows, who chairs the Freedom Caucus, said: “One is an incremental step; the other is really a herculean leap.”

The move follows the UN Security Council unanimously backing a motion calling for the end of Israel building settlements on disputed land in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. In the past the US has vetoed resolutions it deemed were critical of the Jewish state but the outgoing administration under President Barack Obama made the rare decision not to vote. The resolution was passed by 14 votes to nothing last month.

The diplomatic move was seen as hugely controversial and led to widespread condemnation from both Democrats and Republicans. Mr Meadows stated the decision would help fuel support for the US to end its commitments to the UN. He said: “Israel is a bipartisan issue so I think that [if the proposal] is measured and appropriate we could pick up a lot of Democrats to support it as well.”

Should the group get their way in Congress this would have a serious impact on the UN as the US contributes almost a quarter – 22 percent – of the UN’s entire funding. The US contributed £480million ($594m) to the UN’s regular budget plus an additional £1.9billion ($2.3bn) to the peacekeeping budget.

The move by the Congress group has also received support from senior Republicans in the Senate. The controversial Ted Cruz, a Texas senator who ran against Mr Trump for the Republican presidential nomination, said he believed efforts to introduce new laws to this effect would take place “very soon”.

Read Full Story At Express

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

On October 1st the USA Will Hand Over Control of the Internet, Endangering Free Speech – Call Congress Now!

By Bethany Blankley September 7, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://constitution.com/october-1-u-s-loses-control-internet-free-speech-call-congress-now/

Obama has once again broken federal law by instructing the U.S. Dept. of Commerce to relinquish U.S. control of the Internet’s Domain Name System to a ‘privatized’ international body, which will take place on October 1, 2016.

Call your senators: 202-224-3121.
Tell them to pass S.3034,“Protecting Internet Freedom Act.”
The United Nations and other countries have no authority to control access to information and eliminate Americans’rights protected by the First Amendment.
Obama broke the law. Americans have a constitutional right to free speech and freedom of the press.

Tyrant Obama

Here’s what happened.

Congress ordered a federal agency (NTIA) to not let a government contract lapse– especially one that includes the IANA function (comparable to an “Internet phone book”), which has been managed by a non-profit organization in California since 1998. The agency chose not to comply with a Congress mandate. Meaning, a federal agency run by unelected bureaucrats ignored elected members of Congress, which is illegal. And Obama is doing nothing about it.

Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information and NTIA (National Telecommunications & Information Administration) Administrator, Lawrence E. Strickling, confirmed that “the NTIA intends to allow the IANA functions contract to expire as of October 1.” Because the agency did not comply with Congress, and failed to renew its contract before the end of this month, the government will be illegally allowing the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) to take over management of the IANA function.

(ICANN is “the private (non-government) non-profit corporation with responsibility for IP address space allocation, protocol parameter assignment, domain name system management, and root server system management functions, the services previously performed by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA).”) The Commerce Department does not have the authority to “turn over control of the Internet to ICANN.” It’s against federal law.

The Washington Examiner reports that:

“the feds are constitutionally prohibited from transferring federal property without approval from Congress. A coalition of 25 advocacy groups like Americans for Tax Reform, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, and Heritage Action sent a letter to Congress making those points last week.”

In response, the coalition of 25 advocacy groups maintain: kingobamafingerconstitution-300x204

“Congress twice enacted appropriations riders prohibiting any use of taxpayer funds ‘to relinquish the responsibility of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration [NTIA] … with respect to Internet domain name system functions, including responsibility with respect to the authoritative root zone file and the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority [IANA] functions.’

“We agree that Internet governance should work from the bottom up, driven by the global comm- unity of private sector, civil society and technical stakeholders. But that “multi-stakeholder” model is fragile. Without robust safeguards, Internet governance could fall under the sway of governments hostile to freedoms protected by the First Amendment.

“If NTIA allows the contract to lapse, it will have violated federal law (31 USC § 1341(a)(1)(A). See also 31 U.S.C § 1350).”

Sen. Ted Cruz (TX) – R introduced S.3034 on June 8, 2016. The bill has been read twice and was referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, which is ridiculous. It’s now the first week in September and the Senate still has not acted. If the Senate does not act they will be allowing a government agency to again break federal law and the very system the U.S. government created. This will end the U.S. government’s “historic role as a guarantor of Internet governance,” and eliminate any constitutional protections of free speech and freedom of the press.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Bethany Blankley

Bethany Blankley is a political analyst for Fox News Radio and has appeared on television and radio programs nationwide. She writes about political, cultural, and religious issues in America from the perspective of an evangelical and former communications staffer. She was a communications strategist for four U.S. Senators, one U.S. Congressman, a former New York governor, and several non-profits. She earned her MA in Theology from The University of Edinburgh, Scotland and her BA in Political Science from the University of Maryland. Follow her @bethanyblankley facebook.com/BlankleyBethany/ & BethanyBlankley.com.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

This U.N. Official Accidentally Crushed His Own Throat Right Before He Was Set To Testify Against Hillary Clinton

Authored by Mac Slavo — June 30, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://freedomoutpost.com/this-u-n-official-accidentally-crushed-his-own-throat-right-before-he-was-set-to-testify-against-hillary-clinton/

Call it conspiracy theory, coincidence or just bad luck, but any time someone is in a position to bring down Hillary Clinton by testifying they wind up dead. In fact, there’s a long history of Clinton-related body counts, with scores of people dying under mysterious circumstances.

Perhaps the most notable is Vince Foster. Foster was a partner at Clinton’s law firm and knew the inner workings of the Clinton Machine. Police ruled that death a suicide, though it is often noted that Foster may have been suicided.

Now, another official has found himself on the wrong end of the Clintons. That John Ashe was a former President of the United Nations General Assembly highlights the fact that no one is safe once in their sights.

And as you might have guessed, there are major inconsistencies with Ashe’s death. It was not only conveniently timed because Ashe died just a few days before being set to testify against Clinton in a corruption case, but official reports indicated he died of a heart attack.

The problem, however, is that police on the scene reported Ashe died when his throat was crushed during a work-out accident.

The New York Post’s Page Six reported that after Ashe was found dead Wednesday, the U.N. claimed that he had died from a heart attack. Local police officers in Dobbs Ferry, New York, later disputed that claim, saying instead that he died from a workout accident that crushed his throat.

Adding to the mysterious nature of Ashe’s death was the fact that he had been slated to be in court Monday with his Chinese businessman co-defendant Ng Lap Seng, from whom he reportedly received over $1 billion in donations during his term as president of the U.N. General Assembly.

And then there was this: During the presidency of Bill Clinton, Seng illegally funneled several hundred thousand dollars to the Democrat National Committee.

Source: The Conservative Tribune via The Daily Sheeple

It must be coincidence, right?

If former Secret Service agent Gary Byrne is to be believed, this is business as usual for the Clintons.

Excerpt via Zero Hedge:

BYRNE: I feel so strongly that people need to know the real Hillary Clinton and how dangerous she is in her behavior. She is not a leader. She is not a leader.

SEAN: She does not have the temperament?

BYRNE: She doesn’t have the temperament. She didn’t have the temperament to handle the social office when she was First Lady, she does not have the temperament.

SEAN: She’s dishonest.

BYRNE: She’s dishonest, she habitually lies, anybody that can separate themselves from their politics and review her behavior over the past 15 years…

Byrne is the author of the newly published book Crisis Of Character – a first-hand Clinton exposé.

Article reposted with permission from SHTF Plan

lying so long true battle In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

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

By Paul Bedard (@SecretsBedard) • 4/25/16

URL of the original posting site: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/u.s.-eyes-ways-to-expand-syrian-refugees-from-10000-to-200000/article/2589441

Syrian refugees Wafa, no last name available, at center with white scarf, and her husband Osama, second from left, hold their children’s hands as they arrive with another Syrian family at the St. Egidio Community in Rome, Saturday, April 16, 2016. (AP Photo/Alessandra Tarantino)

In a move around the standard refugee settlement process in America, the United Nations and the administration are scheming to find other ways to boost the number of Syrians entering the country, from 10,000 this year to possibly 200,000.

U.S. officials, meeting with United Nations human rights officials in Geneva, joined in a project that looks to “alternative safe pathways” to setting Syrian refugees in America and Europe that include pushing colleges and universities to offer tuition programs and encouraging Syrians already in the country to open their homes to those who’ve fled the war-torn Middle East nation.

The plan already has one victory. Last week, the University of Southern California revealed that it is offering five free tuition programs for Syrian refugees, including one in the school’s journalism program.

The effort was revealed Monday in a Center for Immigration Studies post. It quoted a Georgetown University professor and U.N. refugee policy advisor who spelled out the backdoor plan to settle thousands more Syrians past the 10,000 President Obama has pledged to OK this year.

Beth Ferris, a research professor at Georgetown University and U.N. advisor, even suggested a total of 200,000 at a recent Brookings Institution conference:

“Refugees and government officials are expecting this crisis to last 10 or 15 years. It’s time that we no longer work as business as usual … UNHCR next month is convening a meeting to look at what are being called ‘alternative safe pathways’ for Syrian refugees. Maybe it’s hard for the U.S. to go from 2,000 to 200,000 refugees resettled in a year, but maybe there are ways we can ask our universities to offer scholarships to Syrian students. Maybe we can tweak some of our immigration policies to enable Syrian-Americans who have lived here to bring not only their kids and spouses but their uncles and their grandmothers. There may be ways that we could encourage Syrians to come to the U.S. without going through this laborious, time-consuming process of refugee resettlement.”

The Geneva meeting took place March 30 and CIS had the details on what occurred.

The U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, Filippo Grandi, told representatives of 92 nations that they needed to explore “alternative avenues” for the admission of Syrian refugees. He said:

“These pathways can take many forms: not only resettlement, but also more flexible mechanisms for family reunification, including extended family members, labor mobility schemes, student visa and scholarships, as well as visa for medical reasons. Resettlement needs vastly outstrip the places that have been made available so far… But humanitarian and student visa, job permits and family reunification would represent safe avenues of admission for many other refugees as well.”

At the end of the meeting, he said that many countries had made commitments, among them:

— Increasing the number of resettlement and humanitarian admission places.

— Easing family reunification and increase possibilities for family reunion.

— Providing scholarships and student visas for Syrian refugees.

— Removing administrative barriers and simplify processes to facilitate and expedite the admission of Syrian refugees.

— Using resources provided by the private sector in order to create labor mobility schemes for Syrian refugees.

It would be just the latest expansion of benefits for refugees that Americans and other nations already supply. Secrets reported Sunday, for example, that poor refugee children receive more cash payments, food stamps and Social Security than poor American children.

Paul Bedard, the Washington Examiner’s “Washington Secrets” columnist, can be contacted at pbedard@washingtonexaminer.com

true battle In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Category:

International Politics

Tagged with:

The Supreme Court Just Delivered A Crippling Blow To Obama’s Global Warming Agenda

Reported by Michael Bastasch; 02/09/2016

URL of the original posting site: http://dailycaller.com/2016/02/09/the-supreme-court-just-delivered-a-crippling-blow-to-obamas-global-warming-agenda/#ixzz3znzusaLZ

The U.S. Supreme Court just delivered a major blow to President Barack Obama’s global warming agenda by halting the implementation of a key Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulation on carbon dioxide emissions. The court won’t allow the EPA to implement its so-called Clean Power Plan (CPP), which aims to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from power plants 32 percent by 2030. This is a big win for the 29 states suing the federal government to stop a rule expected to cripple the coal industry.

“Five justices of the Supreme Court agreed with North Dakota and other parties that EPA’s regulation would impose massive irreparable harms on North Dakota and the rest of the country and that there was a substantial likelihood EPA was acting unlawfully,” Paul Seby, an attorney with law firm Greenberg Traurig representing the state of North Dakota, told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

States asked the Supreme Court to halt implementation of the CPP after a lower court rejected their appeal in January. Now, Morrisey and the Obama administration will make their oral arguments on the merits of the law in front of federal judges in June.

“Make no mistake – this is a great victory for West Virginia,” said West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey, who’s leading the states against the EPA, in a statement on the announcement.

Morrisey argues the CPP amounts to “double regulating” by the EPA, since coal-fired power plants — the main target of the rule — are already being regulated under another provision of the Clean Air Act. States also argue the CPP is in effect a federal takeover of their energy policies.

“We are thrilled that the Supreme Court realized the rule’s immediate impact and froze its implementation, protecting workers and saving countless dollars as our fight against its legality continues,” Morrisey said.

This is the second major EPA regulation to be held up by the courts in recent months. Last year, federal judges issued a stay on an agency rule redefining “waters of the United States” — this sparked backlash from nearly every industry from farmers to energy producers.

But defeating the CPP in court may not be as easy as states think, since the Obama administration will likely argue striking down these rules would go against international commitments made by the U.S. in Paris last year. In December, the U.S. joined nearly 200 countries in pledging to reduce carbon dioxide emissions to fight global warming. Obama promised to cut emissions 26 to 28 percent by 2025. Solid-Foundation-600-wLogo

The Obama administration, however, may have problems of its own because it has not gotten the agreement ratified by the Senate — a key requirement for a legally binding treaty. This has only added to the confusion of whether or not the United Nations Paris deal is legally a treaty or not.

“This will be a fatal blow to the president’s climate agenda,” Tom Pyle, president of the Institute for Energy Research, told TheDCNF.

“This shows just how far the Obama administration has gone — they went too far,” Pyle said.

Baal Worship Settled-Science-600-LA In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

UN calls on world to fight ISIS as Security Council unanimously adopts French-drafted resolution

Published : 21 Nov, 2015

URL of the original posting site: https://www.rt.com/news/322931-un-resolution-fight-terrorism-isis

The resolution “calls upon member states that have the capacity to do so to take all necessary measures … on the territory under the control of ISIL … in Syria and Iraq.”

IS “constitutes a global and unprecedented threat to international peace and security,” the resolution says.

Russia has repeatedly called for action to cut the terrorists’ financial lifelines, with President Vladimir Putin revealing on Monday that IS is receiving funding from 40 countries.

Syria’s UN Ambassador, Bashar Ja’afari, hinted prior to Friday’s vote that this resolution was long overdue. “Welcome to everybody who finally woke up and joined the club of combating terrorists.”

Meanwhile, Russia is continuing its work on a draft resolution proposing international military campaigns to fight against Islamic State. The current text is an updated version of a document submitted on September 30. The text, submitted on November 18, stresses the need to coordinate military actions with the governments of the countries where the anti-terror operations are being conducted.

Russia’s Ambassador to the UN, Vitaly Churkin, said that Moscow is working towards having the draft resolution passed soon. Churkin also stressed that it is shortsighted of some UNSC members to try to block Russia’s draft resolution on fighting terrorism.

“We believe the attempts by several members of the UN Security Council to block our work on the project is politically shortsighted. You can fight terrorism with one hand and with the other practically play along with them,” Churkin said.

After the vote, Churkin also added that the French delegates included “important corrections introduced by Russia” into the resolution. Russia’s Ambassador to the UN was assertive when calling on international players to unite against the threat of global terrorism, adding that any plan must be based on “concrete steps.”

ISIS is contained DELUSIONAL America Never Forget In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Obama’s U.N. plan: Globalize cops against ‘violent extremists’

Posted By Leo Hohmann On 10/06/2015

Article printed from WND: http://www.wnd.com

URL to article: http://www.wnd.com/2015/10/obamas-u-n-plan-globalize-cops-against-violent-extremists

U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch, shown here with Baltimore police, announced the new “Strong Cities Network” to plug local departments into international cooperation and “shared resources” with their peers across the globe.

President Obama’s new “Strong Cities Network,” announced with little fanfare last week at the United Nations, appears to be another effort to strip authority from local police departments and to demonize conservative Christians, say advocates of civil and religious liberties.

The stated goal of the program is to connect local police departments with their peers around the world in an effort to combat “violent extremism,” according to Attorney General Loretta Lynch, who announced the program to the U.N. on Sept. 30.

Lynch, with New York Mayor Bill DeBlasio by her side, told world leaders that the time has come for a more globalized and comprehensive effort to combat violent extremism. She said:

“Until now, we have lacked that mechanism. We haven’t had the benefit of sustained or coordinated cooperation among the growing number of cities and municipalities that are confronting this ongoing challenge. Communities have too often been left isolated and alone. But through the Strong Cities Network that we have unveiled today, we are making the first systematic effort in history to bring together cities around the world to share experiences, to pool resources and to forge partnerships in order to build local cohesion and resilience on a global scale. Today we tell every city, every town and every community that has lost the flower of its youth to a sea of hatred – you are not alone. We stand together and we stand with you.”

De Blasio called it a global coalition of cities seeking to combat extremism and terrorism in all of its “many forms,” and he assured the ACLU that the program would not lead to the profiling of Muslims.

New York Mayor Bill De Blasio.

So far, about two dozen other cities have signed up including Paris, London, Mumbai, Montreal, Atlanta, Minneapolis, Denver, Tunis, Oslo, Beirut and Palermo, among others.

Pastor Shahram Hadian of the Everette, Washington-based Truth in Love Project, said it’s no coincidence that the project was launched at the United Nations.

“So who are they going to target when they talk about violent extremism?” asked Hadian, a former Muslim who grew up in Iran and now travels nationwide teaching churches and law enforcement about the dangers of Shariah law. “Well, if you look at their track record, it always seems to be that your violent extremists are your Christians, your veterans and your Second Amendment advocates.”

National media blackout

Paul McGuire, a Fox News and History Channel contributor who has authored several books including the new release, “The Babylon Code: Solving the Bible’s Greatest End Times Mystery,” said it’s also interesting how little media coverage was given to Obama’s Strong Cities global policing program.

“There was no national media coverage whatsoever of the Strong Cities Network; it was completely buried,” McGuire said. “So the question is, why? This is massive because it’s such a contradiction to the Constitution, and there was no consultation with Congress, and they did a complete end-run around everything that our Constitution stands for.”

Like Hadian, McGuire sees a sinister motive in the use of the term “violent extremism,” which he said is an attempt to draw a moral equivalency among all religions, even though 99 percent of all religious-based violence in the world today involves Muslims killing non-Muslims.

“That’s code for ‘We’re going to crack down on Christian values and conservative values,’ because they’ve already announced that they’re pro-Islamic,” McGuire said. “Proof that both political parties are involved in this, is the fact that not one single Republican has brought it up. This is a direct intrusion of the U.N. into the sovereign status of the U.S. at every level, and not one single Republican brought it up.”

WND reported in August that the Obama administration is, indeed, targeting conservatives in its campaign against “violent extremism.” The FBI, according to the report, sent out a bulletin to state, local and national law enforcement warning of attacks against Muslims by “militia extremists” even though no proof of such an impending attack existed.

Police and veterans are also under pressure to conform to Obama’s agenda of giving special concern to Muslims and other minorities in the wake of the Ferguson, Missouri, riots.

Hadian said that as racial tensions increase in U.S cities, often stoked by paid outside radicals to whom the government turns a blind eye, it appears Obama is trying to goad the so-called “right wingers” into an attack.

“They tried the race bait, and it hasn’t really happened the way they had planned,” he said. “Perhaps Muslim baiting is now a part of their plan, even though the true narrative is the exact opposite as we’ve seen in Roseburg, Oregon, and in Garland, Texas; Chattanooga, Tennessee; Oklahoma City; Fort Hood, Texas; and the Boston Marathon.”

In each of those attacks, Muslims or Muslim sympathizers were identified as the attackers, with their targets being innocent Christians, civilians or the military.

Even in Charleston, South Carolina, it was black Christians who were targeted, in that case by an anti-Christian young white man, Dylan Roof, with mental health problems.

When a young Muslim couple was killed in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, last year in an argument over a parking space, the Council for American-Islamic Relations tried to paint the crime as motivated by anti-Muslim bigotry. This theory was debunked by all the evidence collected by police, but CAIR has never retracted its statements.

So CAIR, in bed with federal law enforcement, is looking hard to pin a “hate crime” on a conservative Christian so they will have their poster child for a police-state crack down on free speech along with new gun-control laws, Hadian said.

“That’s CAIR’s modus operandi now, saying not just that you’re an Islamophobe but that you’re inciting violence (against Muslims) whenever you say anything critical of Islam,” Hadian said.

CAIR was exposed as a front for the Muslim Brotherhood in the 2007 Holy Land Foundation trial, the largest terror-financing trial ever conducted on U.S. soil, yet several of its leaders have gone on to fill advisory roles within the Obama administration.

‘Waiting for someone to attack a Muslim’

So the threat to Christians is real, said Hadian, and that’s why it’s important to balance the truth about Islam and its Quranic calls to jihad and Shariah with a call for evangelization and love.

“It’s not about hating Muslims. We want to save them, reach out to them with the truth of the gospel, and we know this is a spiritual battle,” he said. “At the same time, we are becoming targets. It seems like at everyone one of these (mass shooting) events they are going to go out of their way to paint the extremist as some right-wing guy, and it just seems to fall apart every time they try to push that narrative.”

Pastor Shahram Hadian

“I have no problem encouraging people to defend their homes and their lives, but we certainly don’t need to go on the offensive because this is what they are looking for,” Hadian said. “They’re waiting for someone to attack a Muslim so they can say, ‘Aha, see, I told you so.’”

‘Eyes in the sky’

Enlisting global “cooperation” against the “violent extremist” should send chills down the spine of every American, said John Whitehead, a constitutional lawyer, founder of the Rutherford Institute and author of “Battlefield America: The War on the American People.”

“As I have been saying for quite a while, we have practically moved into a global government already,” Whitehead told WND.

“You look at the NSA’s Five Eyes Program, and this is spread around the world,” he said. “They’ve created basically an electronic concentration camp, and they’re working with Google to do it. In essence, globalism armed with technology is going to happen and under Obama we’ve moved closer and closer to federalizing the police. The FBI is moving into several local police departments, most recently in Oakland (California). Their main job is to use social media to track people.”

Now, with Strong Cities Network, U.S. cities will be cooperating and “sharing resources” with foreign governments around the world. Local police are already training with FBI, DHS and even the military. Obama’s new program lays the groundwork for them to train with foreign police units under the banner of the U.N.

“With the Strong Cities program we see the goal is to have global police, so it’s going to be very hard to rein in global cops,” Whitehead said. “Cops who were trained locally are going by the wayside, dealing solely with local cops is going to be a thing of the past. It’s sort of in your face, it’s saying the U.N. is going to be a global police force, working in this country one way or the other. New York City, L.A., Chicago are going to lead the way. Americans better get ready for this because what it means is, our Constitution is being replaced, and the constitutional protections we have will be gone.”

Among the first steps taken will involve merging some of the law-enforcement capacities within regions, with U.S. cops cooperating more closely with those of Mexico and Canada, Whitehead said.

“They’re working to fuse them together, so local autonomy, local authority, will be diluted and eventually eliminated,” he said. “They’re already globalizing, technology demands it.

“Google is moving quickly with robotics, driverless cars, and coordinating everything on the web under one umbrella,” he continued. “Amazon was paid $600 million to build an intelligence cloud for the FBI, DHS and CIA.”

Eric Schmidt, the renowned software engineer, is involved in international elitist groups such as the secretive Bilderbergs, Whitehead said, and Hillary Clinton spoke at the last three major events for Google.

“You have John Podesta (Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager). Eric Schmidt. Google, Amazon,” he said. “They want world government. Hillary wants it, Obama wants it. So that is where it is heading.”

McGuire said the U.N. will always pick a “politically correct” situation in which to intervene. It will not intervene to stop the slaughter of Christians in the Middle East, but it will intervene to protect transgenders, Islam or perceived racial bias by police. That’s why U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon called for the protection of civil rights during the Ferguson uprising in August 2014 even as rioters were looting, turning over police cars and burning buildings.

Gun control tops U.N. agenda for law enforcement

“Whatever the U.N. moves into, it’s always a politically correct situation. So when the Michael Brown protests were going on, the U.N. secretary general demanded that police adhered to what he called ‘U.S. and international standards,’ and he’s basically taking authority over local police forces,” McGuire said.

Another critical aspect of the U.N. agenda is universal gun registration and gun control.

“We all know that you have to get rid of the guns to bring in the dictatorship. Hitler did this, the Soviets did it,” McGuire said. “So they know that, and that’s why Hillary Clinton wants to overhaul gun laws and Obama is now talking about using executive actions to enact gun control.”

After finishing the research for his latest book, “The Babylon Code,” which he co-authored with journalist Troy Anderson, McGuire said he came to an unavoidable conclusion.

“I believe we are now reaching a tipping point that is going to happen very soon,” McGuire said. “It could happen overnight and most likely after a crisis event. The U.N. is already in control of a great deal, but we are going to see the U.N. come out of the shadows and openly exercise its authority over the United States. They will still have some kind of illusion of the United States for the masses, but I believe the elites are ready to bring global government out of the closet, and we’re going to see a very radical, aggressive change. They want to do this by 2030, and in Paris they’re going to announce another round of sweeping changes (in November) and then you look at all the trigger points, the Syrian war, the international debt crisis, etcetera.”

Using refugees, mass immigration to build ‘social cohesion?’

While the Strong Cities Network talks a lot on its website about “building social cohesion” in the world’s cities, the policies of the globalists are achieving just the opposite. They are using Islam and Muslim refugees to “break down social cohesion all over the world,” McGuire says, setting the stage for mass unrest. When the predictable violence breaks out, the solution will be police-state crackdowns.

“They’re using refugees in Germany to take over towns and cities. And here in U.S., they’re using refugees to wage war on the social cohesion of our society. So they’re going to slam-dunk the global government, and it will be a terrorist attack or financial crisis that triggers it,” McGuire said.

Author and blogger Pamela Geller also believes that the Strong Cities’ references to “building social cohesion” are a form of Orwellian Doublespeak. The real intent, she says, is to demonize and punish anyone who criticizes the growing Islamization of their community.

The term “social cohesion” is a “euphemism” for keeping peace between non-Muslim and Muslim communities – “mostly by making sure that non-Muslims don’t complain too loudly about, much less work against, rapidly expanding Muslim populations and the Islamization of their communities,” Geller writes.

According to the U.N.’s own data, more than 70 percent of “refugees” arriving in Europe are healthy Islamic men between the ages of 18 and 45.

“That’s an army. The Europeans aren’t stupid,” McGuire said. “They have strategically allowed this in collusion with the pope, who softened the people up with his statements, and so the purpose of this is, you’ve broken down the Euro-centric identity with European Western values.”

By forcibly injecting waves of Islamic migrants into Europe, the stage has been set for riots and violence. “That will demand a police-state crack down,” McGuire said. “And the other half of the equation is you create Shariah law, and you break apart that non-Islamic consensus so Europe no longer has a European culture and is therefore more likely to assimilate into globalism.

“That synergistically with the Muslim refugees would produce anarchy throughout Europe that would demand an authoritarian police state takeover, and suddenly the U.N. is no longer a set of ‘would you please do this, or please do that’ type recommendations. You’ve created the trigger points and the crisis points. You’ve created on top of it a huge number of people who will always vote socialist. The same potential exists here as in Europe, a crisis and then an authoritarian U.N. government moving in to take control of the mayhem. It’s dark and dirty, and most people do not want to face it, but it’s a real danger.”

If anyone doubts that sinister motives lie behind efforts like the Strong Cities Network, McGuire says all they need do is study the words of the world’s most elite globalists, such as Henry Kissinger.

“Today Americans would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told there was an outside threat from beyond whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will pledge with world leaders to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well being granted to them by their world government.”

– Kissinger in an address to the Bilderberg meeting at Evian, France, May 21, 1991, as transcribed from a tape-recording made by one of the Swiss delegates.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

STRONG CITIES NETWORK: Obama Admin and UN Just Announced a ‘Global Police Force’ to Fight ‘Violent Extremists’ in US Cities

Before you read the following, I need to remind you that this is coming from the Justice Department’s arm of the “Great Leftist/Marxist/Socialist Propaganda Machine”. As you are ready, you will see the term “violent extremism” used a lot. Yet, there is NO MENTION OF WHO VIOLET EXTREMEIST ARE, OR THE ORGANIZATIONS TJHEY ARE ASSOCIATED WITH. So please read this with that filter in your mind’s eye, so you won’t be deceived.

This is a very dangerous action taking place. Remember this”

How you and I define “extremism” is not how the mind of Leftist/Marxist/Socialist define “extremism”. Once in motion, THE U.N. CAN DETERMINE THAT ALL CHRISTIANS, THEIR DEFINITION, ARE THE MOST DANGEROUS AND WE BECOME ENEMY NUMBER ONE. That that remind you of scripture? Can you say, “Anti-Christ”?

Also keep in mind the following:

What they say, is never what they mean. They are masters at manipulating the language to make Americans believe. In Addition, remember this from yesterday?

They are consistent. Their determination to create a “ONE-WORLD-GOVERNMENT” has taken another step. So why hasn’t our Presidential Candidates brought this up? We need to ask them!

So, read on with this warning, and be armed when your Liberals friends, in-laws, out-laws and others try to convince you that this is a good thing.

Jerry Broussard of WhatDidYouSay.org

Department of Justice

Office of Public Affairs

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Monday, September 28, 2015

Launch of Strong Cities Network to Strengthen Community Resilience Against Violent Extremism

Cities are vital partners in international efforts to build social cohesion and resilience to violent extremism. Local communities and authorities are the most credible and persuasive voices to challenge violent extremism in all of its forms and manifestations in their local contexts. While many cities and local authorities are developing innovative responses to address this challenge, no systematic efforts are in place to share experiences, pool resources and build a community of cities to inspire local action on a global scale.

“The Strong Cities Network will serve as a vital tool to strengthen capacity-building and improve collaboration,” said Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch. “As we continue to counter a range of domestic and global terror threats, this innovative platform will enable cities to learn from one another, to develop best practices and to build social cohesion and community resilience here at home and around the world.”

The Strong Cities Network (SCN) – which launches September 29^th at the United Nations – will empower municipal bodies to fill this gap while working with civil society and safeguarding the rights of local citizens and communities.

The SCN will strengthen strategic planning and practices to address violent extremism in all its forms by fostering collaboration among cities, municipalities and other sub-national authorities.

“To counter violent extremism we need determined action at all levels of governance,” said Governing Mayor Stian Berger Røsland of Oslo while commenting on their participation in the SCN. “To succeed, we must coordinate our efforts and cooperate across borders. The Strong Cities Network will enable cities across the globe pool our resources, knowledge and best practices together and thus leave us standing stronger in the fight against one of the greatest threats to modern society.”

The SCN will connect cities, city-level practitioners and the communities they represent through a series of workshops, trainings and sustained city partnerships. Network participants will also contribute to and benefit from an online repository of municipal-level good practices and web-based training modules and will be eligible for grants supporting innovative, local initiatives and strategies that will contribute to building social cohesion and resilience to violent extremism.

The SCN will include an International Steering Committee of approximately 25 cities and other sub-national entities from different regions that will provide the SCN with its strategic direction. The SCN will also convene an International Advisory Board, which includes representatives from relevant city-focused networks, to help ensure SCN builds upon their work. It will be run by the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD), a leading international “think-and-do” tank with a long-standing track record of working to prevent violent extremism:

“The SCN provides a unique new opportunity to apply our collective lessons in preventing violent extremism in support of local communities and authorities around the world”, said CEO Sasha Havlicek of ISD. “We look forward to developing this international platform for joint innovation to impact this pressing challenge.”

“It is with great conviction that Montréal has agreed to join the Strong Cities Network founders,” said the Honorable Mayor Denis Coderre of Montreal. “This global network is designed to build on community-based approaches to address violent extremism, promote openness and vigilance and expand upon local initiatives like Montréal’s Mayors’ International Observatory on Living Together. I am delighted that through the Strong Cities Network, the City of Montréal will more actively share information and best practices with a global network of leaders on critical issues facing our communities.”

The Strong Cities Network will launch on Sept. 29^, from 4:00 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. EDT, following the Leaders’ Summit on Countering ISIL and Violent Extremism. Welcoming remarks will be offered by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Prince Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein and Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York City, who will also introduce a Keynote address by U.S. Attorney General Lynch. Following this event, the Strong Cities International Steering Committee, consisting of approximately 25 mayors and other leaders from cities and other sub-national entities from around the globe, will hold its inaugural meeting on Sept. 30, 2015, from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. EDT.

For more information, please visit www.strongcitiesnetwork.org [external link] or contact Sabine Barton via email at: info@strongcitiesnetwork.org

Email links icon

or telephone: +44 207 493 9333+44 207 493 9333.

Category:

International Politics

Tagged with:

Obama has turned Putin into the world’s most powerful leader

By Benny Avni

Barack Obama extends his hand to Vladimir Putin during their meeting at the United Nations General Assembly. Photo: Reuters

The baton was officially transferred Monday to the world’s new sole superpower — and Vladimir Putin willingly picked it up. President Obama (remember him?) embraced the ideals espoused by the United Nations’ founders 70 years ago: Diplomacy and “international order” will win over time, while might and force will lose.

Putin, too, appealed to UN laws (as he sees them), but he also used his speech to announce the formation of a “broad international coalition” to fight ISIS in Syria and Iraq. “Similar to the anti-Hitler coalition, it could unite a broad range of forces” to fight “those who, just like the Nazis, sow evil and hatred of humankind,” he said.

And who’d lead this new coalition? Hint: Moscow has always celebrated the Allies’ World War II victory as a Russian-led fete.

Oh, and if anyone wondered which Syrian players the coalition would rely on as allies, Putin made it clear: “No one but President [Bashar al-]Assad’s armed forces and Kurd militia are fighting the Islamic State.” That, of course, isn’t Obama’s view. America’s president said he opposed the “logic of supporting tyrants.” After all, Assad “drops barrel bombs on innocent children.”

But Putin has troops in Syria, is arming Assad to the teeth and signed a pact of anti-ISIS intelligence-sharing with Assad, Iran and the leaders of Iraq (the ones America fought to put in power).

And after meeting Obama for the first time in two years Monday, he spoke vaguely about future “joint air attacks on ISIS.” But no agreement on Assad was reached in the 90-minute meeting.

Meantime, if Obama has any realistic Syria plan of his own — beyond having Assad magically “transitioned” out of the country and simultaneously fighting ISIS — he failed to present it during his UN speech. Or any other time.

Instead, he scolded an “isolated” Putin for using force to annex Crimea and other parts of Ukraine. “Imagine if, instead, Russia had engaged in true diplomacy,” said Obama. “That would be better for Ukraine, but also better for Russia, and better for the world.” Then again, imagine if Obama’s eloquence were backed by, say, American-led NATO. Would Putin so easily be able to eat up Ukraine and take over Syria? Not likely.

But even as he chided Russia, China and even Iran for being steeped in the policies of the past, it was Obama who at times sounded like a throwback to days of yore.

His celebration of the United Nations was reminiscent of scenes from 1950s movies that portrayed it as a place where problems are actually resolved. In reality, along the decades (and even more so in the last six years), the UN became so paralyzed that it can no longer serve as arbiter of global security.

Obama’s speech was, as ever, full of promise. His turn from using “might” to claiming to have “right” on his side and relying on diplomacy have led to America’s opening up to Cuba and a key deal with Iran on nukes. But these are yet to yield positive results. “If this deal is implemented,” he said of Iran, “our world is safer.” Big if.

By contrast, Putin’s deployment of forces in Syria and arming of Assad create facts on the ground. They have also propelled him to the top by taking initiative on today’s most consequential world fight.

Although Obama received much less applause during his Monday speech than in past years, he’s still well-liked at the world body. Yet those who count, the ones he scolded in his speech — Putin, Assad, China’s Xi Jinping and even Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani — weren’t in their seats to hear his words.

Because as forceful as Obama’s words are, they’re rarely backed by action.

Putin? Nobody applauded him. He’s more interested in being feared than liked. Then again, his words, at most, are meant to explain forceful action. That’s how Putin seized leadership from America.

And that, to borrow from Obama’s speech, is bad for Syria, where the war will continue as long as Assad remains in power. It’s bad for Europe and Syria’s neighbors, which have no idea what to do with that war’s refugees.

And it’s bad for America. Because sooner or later, after more bloodshed and under even worse conditions than now, our next president will be called upon to retake the leadership baton from Putin. And that could prove tricky.

Category:

International Politics

Tagged with:

Breaking: Iranian Regime Already Breaks Nuclear Deal – Quds Forces Leader Visits Russia

Posted by Jim Hoft Aug 6th, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/08/breaking-iranian-regime-already-breaks-nuclear-deal-quds-forces-leader-visits-russia/#disqus_thread

The Iranian regime already broke the the nuclear deal with the West.

Quds Force leader Qassem Soleimani already visited Moscow despite a .
Israeli activist Omri Ceren reported:

Fox News just published an exclusive confirming that Iranian Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani just visited Moscow even though he’s under a travel ban and prohibited from leaving Iran by United Nations Security Council sanctions. The article is at the bottom of this email and has details down to the Air Iran flight numbers and times of his arrival and departure.

Evidence of sanctions-busting by Soleimani has the potentially to be politically disastrous for the Obama administration. The Iranian general was originally sanctioned for a wide range of terror activities, including against Americans: U.S. military officials estimate that he has the blood of roughly 500 American soldiers on his hands and that the majority of American causalities during the final two years of Iraq were because of his surrogates [a][b]. The JCPOA lifted many sanctions against Soleimani were lifted under the final JCPOA, generating a flood of criticism and forcing the administration to go into damage control mode.

At first the State Department denied the concession even existed, with Kerry claiming that it was a different Qassem Soleimani who was being delisted [c]. That was false and so the White House quickly had to concede that the general was indeed getting sanctions relief [d].

Administration officials then shifted to declaring that the delisting was the best they could do: it would occur 8 years into the deal, after the UN’s sanctions authority lapsed, and would never occur on a domestic level at all. In the meantime they emphasized that both sets of sanctions would be vigorously enforced at the international level.

A senior administration official told reporters on July 14 “IRGC Commander Qassem Soleimani will not be delisted at the United Nations… [until] 8 years into the deal, so sanctions are not being lifted early on Qassem Soleimani… his designation under U.S. sanctions will in no way be impacted by the [JCPOA]. Since secondary sanctions remain in place on the U.S. side, this means that sanctions on Qassam Soleimani will still have an international effect” Kerry made the same point on July 29 to the Senate Armed Services “under the United States’ initiative… [Soleimani] will never be relieved of any sanctions” [g]. The talking point was built into a White House memo titled “The Iran Deal: What You Need to Know About the JCPOA” [e]:

Category:

International Politics

Tagged with:

Putin Lays Claim to North Pole

By Newsmax Wires | Thursday, 06 Aug 2015 11:22 PM

URL of the original posting site: http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/putin-russia-claim-north-pole/2015/08/06/id/665858/#ixzz3iACwU8Il

: Image: Putin Lays Claim to North Pole (Newsmax File Photo)

Russia has filed claim with the United Nations for 463,000 square miles of of the Arctic Ocean, including the North Pole, according to reports.

The territory contains some of the world’s largest untapped reserves of fossil fuels, as well as valuable minerals, reports CNBC.

Russia’s claim is filed under the 1982 U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, which establishes the rights to exclusive economic zones beyond a nation’s borders.

The convention allows for a 200-mile zone from recognized borders, except where a country can demonstrate that the continental shelf on which it sits actually extends farther then 200 miles. In such cases, the law recognizes a 350-mile limit.

The U.N. rebuffed a similar effort by Russia in 2002.

If the U.N. accepts Russia’s petition this time, it would give the government of President Vladimir Putin oversight of the the waters on economic matters, including fishing and oil and gas drilling, though will not have full sovereignty, The New York Times says.

Related Stories:

Category:

International Politics

Tagged with:

U.N. Makes Move to Create Massive Tax Agency: This Will DESTROY Our Constitution

Authored by Michael Becker — August 3, 2015

Barack Obama is a globalist of the first order and his Democratic Party is right there with him. They love the UN. They love all things European. And most of all they hate America and all things American. Obama and his stooges have done their very best over the past seven years to destroy American influence in the world, to destroy free markets and capitalism. If a Democrat is elected next year, we may actually see the Progressive dream of One World Government and it will be headquartered out of the UN.

Only slightly off topic, Barack Obama wants to head the UN.

Taxes are always a big topic. Democrats want to raise them, most Republicans want to lower them. The whole theory of governing of the Democratic Party is that the rich need to be taxed more to “help” the poor. On that note, the biggest threat to your tax bill isn’t Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton. It’s Barack Obama’s United Nations.

Third World dictators and tax-funded “civil society” groups have stepped up their demands for a United Nations tax authority — supposedly to ensure that they all get their “fair share” of the loot from Western taxpayers and businesses. The coalition to create the proposed UN tax regime includes more than 130 national governments and dictatorships involved in the G77, which recently demanded a “New World Order to Live Well.”

The bottom line is simple. The rest of the world wants American tax dollars. In the name of ‘fairness.”

You might be thinking that it won’t effect you because they’ll just “go after the rich.” You’re half right. They are going to go after the rich. The “Evil One-Percent.” Your problem is, you don’t know who the “Evil One-Percent” is.

In order to reach that top 1 percent status, you need to earn around $47,500 per year. That’s about the average per capita income in the United States …

If you only earn $25,000 per year, you’re in the top 10 percent. Even if you earn the official poverty line in the United States — $11,344 (for 2010) — you’re in the top 13 percent of all income earners, give or take a percentage point.

Are you getting the idea? I’ll bet you didn’t realize that YOU are the Evil One-Percent! And the UN wants your money. After all, people are starving in Zimbabwe. And YOU have to do something about it. Why, just think about how many people in the world don’t have access to health care. ObamaCare for the World! And you get to pay for it.

Globalist are anxious to use the UN Treaty to make America subservient to the United Nations. We could get rid of the Congress (some days that’s an attractive idea) and the US court system could be folded into the World Court.

If only the UN had an American Secretary-General who believed in One World government.

If only …

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Boehner vows fight to scuttle Iran nuclear deal

Published July 22, 2015, FoxNews.com

URL of the original posting site: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/07/22/boehner-vows-fight-to-scuttle-iran-nuclear-deal

House Speaker John Boehner vowed Wednesday to do “everything possible” to stop the newly struck Iran nuclear deal, as Congress formally begins consideration of the hard-fought pact. “While the president’s Iran deal may have been applauded at the United Nations, I think he faces serious skepticism here at home,” Boehner told reporters at a briefing. “Let me just assure you that members of Congress will ask much tougher questions this afternoon when we meet with the president’s team, because a bad deal threatens the security of the American people.”

The warning comes just days after the U.N. Security Council endorsed the deal, over the objections of many in Congress. Republicans, and some Democrats, had wanted the administration to wait until Congress reviews it before seeking approval from the United Nations. Congress nevertheless will have its say. Fox News has learned the administration formally sent the deal to Capitol Hill on Sunday — this starts a 60-day clock for lawmakers to consider it, and then vote to approve or disapprove it or take no action.

The White House has launched an aggressive campaign in recent days, trying to sway wavering Democrats while publicly ripping Republicans for opposing the deal. In an appearance on “The Daily Show” Tuesday, Obama portrayed the controversial deal as the best compromise the government could achieve. In a jab at the George W. Bush administration, he joked that his critics think if only former Vice President Dick Cheney had been on the U.S. negotiating team, “then everything would be fine.”

But Congress is facing pressure from both sides of the issue. While the White House lobbies for approval, Israeli Ambassador Ron Dermer, a foe of the Iran nuclear, is telling Republicans that Congress must stop the pact.

Dermer met Wednesday morning with some 30 to 40 Republicans — part of the Conservative Opportunity Society — at the invitation of Rep. Steve King of Iowa, the group’s chairman. Dermer told the group that Congress is the last backstop and no deal is better than a bad deal.

The U.N. action would not take effect for 90 days. Congress technically has limited leverage over the international aspects of the agreement. Still, Obama does not want Congress to kill any part of the deal, and has vowed to veto any such effort. The agreement itself would roll back sanctions in exchange for limits on Iran’s nuclear program, with the ultimate goal of blocking Tehran’s pathway to a nuclear weapon for as long as the deal’s in place.

Critics argue that Iran could still be well-positioned to pursue a nuclear weapon after a decade, all the while reaping billions in economic benefits. Further, they’re concerned the deal gives Iran too much leeway to stall when international inspectors want to visit suspected nuclear sites.

Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., and Rep. Mike Pompeo, R-Kan., said in a statement Tuesday that they learned from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that two “side deals” between Iran and the IAEA will remain secret from Congress and the public. According to the lawmakers, one agreement covers inspection of the Parchin military complex, and the other concerns potential military aspects of Iran’s nuclear program. On the former, they said, Iran would be able to strike a separate arrangement with the IAEA concerning inspections at Parchin.

“In failing to secure the disclosure of these secret side deals, the Obama administration is asking Congress and the American people to trust, but not verify,” Cotton said in a statement. “What we cannot do is trust the terror-sponsoring, anti-American, outlaw regime that governs Iran and that has been deceiving the world on its nuclear weapons work for years.”

Fox News’ Chad Pergram and Lucas Tomlinson and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Imported Muslims arriving now in these U.S. cities

Posted By Leo Hohmann On 06/17/2015

Article printed from WND: http://www.wnd.com

URL to article: http://www.wnd.com/2015/06/syrian-muslims-arriving-now-in-these-u-s-cities

Cheering Syrian rebels. The rebel groups are made up of various Sunni factions all vying to replace the Shiite-led government of Bashar al-Assad. The overwhelming majority of "refugees" coming from Syria are also Sunni Muslim.

A few congressmen are fighting to block the planned importation of thousands of Syrian refugees into American cities and towns, arguing that they present a grave security risk because many Syrians have ties to the Sunni rebel groups ISIS and al-Nusra Front.

But the fact is, as President Obama ignores the concerns of U.S. Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, and others on the House Homeland Security Committee, the Syrians have already started to arrive stateside.

Since January, more than 70 U.S. cities have been on the receiving end of a Syrian visitation.

WND has compiled a complete list of cities (see chart below) that received Syrian refugees since Jan. 1. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Antonio Guterres has as many as 11,000 Syrians in a pipeline waiting for admission into the U.S., which is responsible for screening them for criminal and terrorist activity.

And therein lies the problem.

McCaul has tried to block the arrival of the Syrians based on testimony from FBI counter-terrorism experts. As chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, he held a hearing on the national security risks of the Syrian refugee program in February and has scheduled a second hearing for June 24. He’s also sent two letters to Obama, urging him not to let the U.N. refugee program become a “jihadist pipeline” into the United States.

The Syrian civil war, now more than four years old, has chased more than 3.8 million Syrians from their homes, according to the U.N., which has about 130,000 it wants to resettle permanently in outside countries. Some of the top destination points in the past few months have been in;

Texas, where the cities of Dallas, Fort Worth and Houston have each received more than 20 Syrians since January.
Chicago has received 42 Syrians so far this year, more than any other city,
while San Diego has taken in 25
and Phoenix 20.
The troubled city of Baltimore has not been left out. It has received 19 Syrians
while Louisville, Kentucky, has taken in 21.

“Baltimore is already suffering with all of the black crime violence (in the wake of the Freddie Gray shooting) and now we’re going to plunk down 19 Syrians,” said Ann Corcoran, who runs the watchdog blog Refugee Resettlement Watch. “It doesn’t make sense.”

WND reported earlier this week that 93 percent of the 922 Syrian refugees resettled into the U.S. since the civil war started in 2011 have been Muslim. The vast majority, 86 percent, have been Sunni Muslims, which means some could have ties to the Sunni rebel groups fighting to bring down the government of President Bashar al-Assad, a Shiite Alowite.

Assad protected the Christian minorities who have now come under brutal attack from ISIS and al-Nusra. Yet, only 4.9 percent of the 922 Syrians brought to the U.S. so far as refugees have been Christians.

Syria is home to one of the world’s oldest Christian communities. It was in Antioch, Syria, where followers of Jesus Christ were first called “Christians,” yet their churches have been destroyed and their families decimated by ISIS and al-Nusra terrorists. Many have watched family members beheaded or shot in front of their eyes. “Syria represents the single largest convergence of Islamic terrorists in history,” McCaul wrote in his June 11 letter to Obama. It also represents the largest refugee crisis.

The United States takes in more U.N.-designated refugees than the rest of the world combined. Of the 130,000 Syrians the U.N wants to permanently resettle, the U.S. is being asked to take half, or about 65,000, by the end of Obama’s term in office. The State Department insists they are “intensely screened” even as the FBI has admitted they are impossible to screen because the U.S. has no “boots on the ground in Syria” and Syria is a “failed state” with no reliable law-enforcement data, said Michael Steinbach, deputy director of the FBI’s counter-terrorism unit, in his Feb. 11 testimony before McCaul’s committee.

Growing ‘pockets of resistance’

The State Department, working through nine private contractors and 350 subcontractors, resettles U.N.-certified refugees into more than 190 cities and towns across America. The refugee program has operated in its current form since Congress passed the Refugee Act of 1980.

Some cities in recent years have begun to push back against the arrival of refugees in their communities, saying they have become a burden on social services and aren’t finding jobs that will support themselves without government assistance. Elected leaders in Clarkston, Georgia, for instance, complained in 2011 to Gov. Nathan Deal, who was able to strike a deal in which no new refugees would be sent to the town other than family members of existing refugees.

The mayors of Lynn and Springfield, Massachusetts, as well as Manchester, New Hampshire, and Athens, Georgia, have also questioned why they can’t have more information and influence over how many refugees get sent to their towns. These have been dubbed “pockets of resistance” by the resettlement agencies working for the federal government. A manual was written by one contractor on how to deal with local grassroots activists who push back against the arrival of refugees.

WND last month uncovered a document authored by one of the federal government’s main resettlement contractors that detailed plans to counter the growing “backlash” that is occurring in many cities that would like to shut the refugee spigot off, or at least slow it down. The report recommended monitoring blogs by activists and turning in some to the left-wing Southern Poverty Law Center which could then brand them as “anti-Muslim” or guilty of “Islamophobia.”

The most recent uprising has been in Spartanburg, South Carolina, in the district of Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C.

Gowdy has tried to gather facts on exactly how the program works so he can answer the questions being asked of him by an organized resistance to World Relief’s plans to resettle 60 refugees from Congo, Syria and other countries over the next year.

So far, no Syrians have arrived in Spartanburg, but they have arrived and will continue to arrive in ever larger numbers in many other cities and towns. The chart below logs the numbers who have arrived just in the past five months.

Some of the questions Gowdy has pressed the State Department to answer are:

Who makes the ultimate decision as to which cities get refugees from what countries?
What variables are taken into consideration when distributing these refugees? Is it done, for instance, according to population density, geography, job and housing availability or availability of welfare benefits?
What local officials are brought into the decision-making process and at what point?
How are the other “stakeholders” chosen in the receiving communities?
How are the financial and economic impacts of the refugees to taxpayer-funded budgets being measured in the various cities where they are sent?

Hiding behind ‘public-private partnerships’

As Gowdy discovered, the State Department dodged most of the questions that concerned Americans have been asking for years.

After Secretary of State John Kerry provided an initial response that Gowdy called vague and “wholly inadequate,” the State Department followed up by saying any further information would have to come from the resettlement agency. In the case of Spartanburg, that would be World Relief, an evangelical agency that contracts with the government on resettlement work. Because it is a private agency, World Relief considers its reports on individual cities to be “proprietary information.” The public is not invited to the quarterly meetings in the receiving communities nor, typically, is the local media.

Approximately 70 percent of World Relief’s revenues last year came from government grants totaling $41.2 million, according to its IRS returns. It also receives funding from foundations such as the Vanguard Charitable Foundation, Mustard Seed Foundation, Soros Fund Charitable Foundation, Pfizer Foundation and Global Impact.

Besides World Relief, the other eight resettlement agencies that contract with the government are the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, Church World Service, the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, the International Rescue Committee, Episcopal Migration Ministries, U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants, and the Ethiopian Community Development Council. These nine agencies present themselves to local communities as “charities.”

But if they are truly doing the Lord’s work, why are their budgets funded so heavily by the government, and why have they agreed to carry out their work without sharing the gospel message to their refugee clients, many activists have asked.

The nine contractors share the wealth with more than 350 subcontractors. For instance, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops subcontracts with Catholic Charities, while Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service subcontracts with Lutheran Social Services and Church World Service contracts with affiliates of the National Council of Churches.

Many of the agencies and their myriad subcontractors also accept donations from leftist foundations tied to George Soros, Bill Gates, the Tides Foundation, Walmart, Target, the Komen Foundation, the United Way and many others.

Big money flows into resettlement business

According to research in a new book by James Simpson, an independent investigative journalist, the Lutheran resettlement efforts, which have been very active in bringing Somali refugees into Minnesota among other places, are financed 92 percent by the government. This Lutheran “charity” also receives donations from George Soros’ Open Society Institute, the Ford Foundation, Global Impact, Fidelity Investments, Bank of America and the Annie E. Casey Foundation.

Simpson sums up the program in his book, “The Red-Green Axis: Refugees, Immigration and the Agenda to Erase America.” He writes:

“Hatched by the U.N. and the American Left, the resettlement agenda is dedicated to erasing our culture, traditions and laws, and creating a compliant, welfare-dependent multicultural society with no understanding of America’s constitutional framework and no interest in assimilation. The ultimate target is a voting base large enough for the Left’s long-sought ‘permanent progressive majority.’

“Most people would be shocked to know that America currently takes more refugees from the world’s ghettos than all other refugee resettlement countries in the world combined. The State Department brags about it. Furthermore, most of those refugees are referred to the United States by the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). The refugees (and the illegal aliens flooding the southern border from Central America) are then ‘resettled’ by taxpayer funded ‘Voluntary Agencies’ or VOLAGs as they are called.”

And the CEOs of these resettlement agencies get paid handsomely. According to Simpson’s research, they bring in six-figure salaries of between $300,000 and $500,000 per year. Of the nine main resettlement agencies, six are faith-based or as Simpson says, “nominally religious,” because they operate with mainly government cash and they are forbidden by their government contracts from evangelizing their clients, many of whom are Muslim. “All are in it for the money and top staff make high six figures,” Simpson writes. “Together the VOLAGs are paid close to $1 billion in taxpayer dollars to resettle refugees. Two more organizations (including Baptist Family and Children Services) who settle most of the unaccompanied alien children (UAC) brought the total to over $1.3 billion last year.”

Forty-nine of the 50 states, with Wyoming being the lone exception, have a refugee resettlement program in place with the federal government. In most states the governor appoints a refugee resettlement coordinator to handle the shipments of refugees, but in 12 states the contractors handle the refugees with little or no input from the governor’s office.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Congressman seeks to unlock secret refugee program

Posted By Leo Hohmann On 05/04/2015

Article reblogged from WND: http://www.wnd.com

URL to article: http://www.wnd.com/2015/05/congressman-seeks-to-unlock-secret-refugee-program/

Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., has received a response to his letter demanding answers from Secretary of State John Kerry about the planned resettlement of dozens of foreign refugees in his state. But the answers failed to shed much light on the secrecy that surrounds the refugee program. The process by which cities and towns across the U.S. are selected to receive displaced persons from United Nations refugee camps remains largely a mystery.

As Gowdy discovered, the city of Spartanburg, South Carolina, was approved for an infusion of 60 refugees, mostly from Syria and Africa, by its own state government headed by Republican Gov. Nikki Haley.

And if the program plays out in Spartanburg as it has in communities in Minnesota, California, Texas, Ohio, Illinois, North Carolina, Georgia, Florida and other states, then the 60 refugees will blossom into hundreds and eventually thousands every year. Minnesota, for example, is now receiving more than 2,000 Muslim refugees annually, mostly from Somalia. Texas receives more than 7,000 per year, and California more than 6,000, directly from the Third World.

Here are the top 10 states for refugee resettlement based on fiscal 2014 figures from the State Department website:

Texas, 7,2011

California, 6,110

New York, 4,079

Michigan, 4,000

Florida, 3,519

Arizona, 2,963

Ohio, 2,812

Pennsylvania, 2,743

Georgia, 2,693

Illinois, 2,578

The United Nations and nine private resettlement agencies are pressuring the United States to accept at least 65,000 refugees from Syria by the end of President Obama’s term in office.

Of the 815 Syrian refugees resettled in the U.S. so far, 749, or 92 percent, have been Muslim, according to State Department data. Only 43 Syrians allowed into the U.S. have been Christians, even though the turmoil in Syria and Iraq has driven thousands of Christians from their homes under threat of death by ISIS.

The U.S. takes in more refugees than any other country, about 70,000 per year, and has absorbed 3 million since 1975. But since the early 1990s, the trend has been to accept more from Muslim countries.

Some residents of Spartanburg are upset and asking questions, not only about the security risks associated with importing refugees from a Middle East war zone but also about the numbers of refugees that will eventually end up in their county and how much it will cost to absorb them into schools, housing and health-care facilities.

Almost all refugees coming into the U.S. from war-torn countries are hand-selected by the United Nations.

The plan to send refugees from Syria and Africa to Spartanburg first surfaced in March when a story appeared in a local newspaper.

Gowdy pressed Kerry’s State Department for more information in an April 13 letter.

Kerry’s response on May 1 indicated the process of picking Spartanburg as the country’s newest refugee haven actually began back in April 2013, when World Relief, one of nine private agencies that contract with the government to provide resettlement services, was contacted by local faith groups in Spartanburg. Gowdy’s own office was notified of the plans in August 2014.

Gowdy was not happy with Kerry’s response and fired off another letter May 4 to the secretary of state.

“To begin, it is important to clarify and correct the timeline of events for the proposal. In your response you stated there were two community meetings, one in August 2014 and one in January 2015,” Gowdy wrote to Kerry. “You also stated the proposal was submitted in July 2014 and approved in November 2014. Is this correct? If so, does this mean the resettlement agency had only one community meeting, which occurred after the proposal was submitted and before the State Department’s approval?”

At the “community meetings” no media was invited and the public was not notified, WND has learned.

Gowdy said he sent his initial letter to the State Department on April 13 because he could not answer questions asked of him by constituents regarding plans for refugees in Spartanburg.

“We have provided State’s response so the public can read it. But some of the answers are inadequate and fail to provide specificity on who was consulted at the city and county level, within the public school system, and law enforcement, and if they provided input,” Gowdy said in a statement.

Gowdy is chairman of the House Judiciary Committee’s subcommittee on immigration and border security, which has oversight responsibility for the refugee program. He sent a staff member, Josh Dix, to the secret meeting in August but Dix did not raise any concerns about the resettlement plans, according to Kerry’s response to Gowdy’s letter. Gowdy’s press secretary denied WND’s request for an interview with the congressman Monday and would not answer any questions.

Baptists working to resettle refugees in S.C.

World Relief, a nonprofit evangelical organization that works to resettle refugees nationwide, opened an office earlier this year in Spartanburg. A group of 40 churches and other faith-based groups has signed on to help World Relief resettle the refugees, according to Kerry’s letter to Gowdy. One of the lead agencies working with World Relief is the Spartanburg County Baptist Network. But the plan to place refugees in Spartanburg has been brewing for more than a year, long before any local residents caught wind of it.

Kerry’s letter provides a rare window into how a small group of people in the federal government, local church groups, a federal contractor and a Governor’s state refugee coordinator conspire to plant “seedlings” of refugees into communities across the U.S.

These refugees are seen by the White House and its network of pro-immigration and refugee partners – groups like National Council for La Raza, Welcoming America, the National Partnership for New Americans and the Chamber of Commerce – as potential “new Americans.” The refugees are set up with a full plate of government benefits, placed on a fast track to citizenship and full voting rights.

The White House is also pushing to have the thousands of Central Americans who crossed the southern border last year afforded asylum status, which qualifies them for various welfare benefits and a direct track toward citizenship.

So while Spartanburg residents found out about the plan for their town in March and April, others in key leadership positions have known about it for more than a year. No public hearings have been held before the city council or local school board. Gowdy is still trying to find out exactly who in Spartanburg was made privy to the plans and who provided input.

“The initial interest in resettling refugees in Spartanburg emerged in April 2013 when World Relief was approached by Spartanburg County Baptist Network,” Kerry’s letter states. “The group, along with 25 other individuals and church organizations, expressed their support for a World Relief resettlement program in their city.”

Kerry said the State Department requires the national resettlement agency, in this case World Relief, to “thoroughly assess the local resettlement capacity and environment of any new proposed resettlement sites before determining whether to proceed with resettling refugees in that location.” The staffer Gowdy had present at the meeting in August did not raise any concerns about the program, according to Kerry’s letter.

“Two community meetings (August 2014 and January 2015) were convened to discuss refugee resettlement in the area,” Kerry wrote to Gowdy. “The August meeting, convened by World Relief, was attended by 54 members of the community including Josh Dix from your office, members of local churches, the Immigration Forum, and the Convention and Visitors Bureau for Spartanburg. Mr. Dix did not offer any concerns during the meeting or in follow-up afterward.”

George Soros involved

The National Immigration Forum, which was present at the meeting, receives funding from billionaire George Soros. It is the driving force behind the so-called “Evangelical Immigration Table,” or EIT. Breitbart called it “a front group for players on the institutional left including billionaire George Soros and the Ford Foundation.”

The Immigration Forum and EIT were involved in an advertising campaign promoting the Gang of Eight’s immigration bill in 2013, a bill seen by many right-leaning lawmakers as “amnesty.” One of the Gang of Eight members was Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. Kerry said in his response to Gowdy that Graham was also invited to attend the August meeting on refugees but no one from his staff showed up.

The South Carolina state refugee coordinator, who works for Gov. Nikki Haley, gave her approval in November for the resettlement program to move forward. Christina Jeffrey, a political science instructor at Wofford College in Spartanburg and former historian for the U.S. House of Representatives, said Kerry’s response shows the refugee program is ingrained not only in the federal bureaucracy but in state governments as well.

“It’s another grant program; it isn’t just the feds cramming this down our throats. It’s government corruption at all levels,” she said, “with a lot of money at stake flowing to these contractors.”

World Relief, as the main contractor in Spartanburg, will be awarded a grant from the State Department of $1,975 for every refugee it resettles. Federal rules require $1,125 of that to be used in providing services directly to the refugee such as cash stipends, rents for housing or other material needs during the first 30 to 90 days of the refugee’s arrival. The remaining $850 may be used for staffing and administrative costs.

Nearly 70 percent of World Relief’s budget is covered by government grants. Others among the nine contractors, such as the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, have upward of 90 percent of their refugee work covered by government grants.

Seeking a moratorium on refugees

Jeffrey said she’s happy that Gowdy has taken an interest in the program, but she believes his responsibility goes beyond fact finding. “I can do my own information gathering. I’m not looking to Trey Gowdy for that. I’m looking for him to do his job and provide oversight on whether this is a good use of taxpayers’ money,” Jeffrey told WND.

The refugee program costs the federal government about $1 billion a year, and that does not include the welfare benefits that many refugees receive. The Congressional Research Office recently put out a study that showed 74.2 percent of refugees receive food stamps.

“Rather than just gathering information on the Spartanburg resettlement, how about let’s put the whole program on hold until Congress has a chance to investigate it?” Jeffrey said.

Jeffrey and others have also voiced concerns about national security. Dozens of people from Muslim countries have come to America as refugees only to be charged with providing material support to foreign terrorist organizations, according to FBI reports. At least another 48 cases have been confirmed of Muslim immigrants leaving the U.S. to fight for ISIS in Syria and al-Shabab in Somalia.

The refugee program has flown under the radar for more than 30 years, but controversy flared in February when a top FBI counter-terrorism official, Michael Steinbach, testified before the House Homeland Security committee and said the U.S. has no way to vet the Syrian refugees for possible connections to ISIS and other terrorist organizations.

As WND reported, Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, sent a letter to the White House Jan. 28 citing “serious national security concerns” about the Syrian refugee program and imploring Obama to not let it become a “back door for jihadists.”

Transforming cities, one at a time

Jeffrey believes the Obama administration is using the refugee program, along with its broader immigration policies, for political purposes.

“Their intention is to identify, recruit, transport, whatever you have to do to get 9 million ‘new Americans’ naturalized as citizens and to the polls in November 2016 and beyond,” she said. “I’ve never seen a more blatant ballot-stuffing program in my life.”

Gowdy said in the statement on his website that Kerry’s suggestion that Gowdy had a supportive role in the assignment of refugees to Spartanburg was “patently false.”

“[T]o correct the record, the State Department’s characterization that our office was ‘critical in the process’ of establishing the refugee resettlement is patently false. Our office sent one staff member to one meeting almost one year ago, as State’s own answers to our questions indicate,” the statement said. “We were provided no follow up information on the proposal or implementation of the plan, nor did we at any point provide approval of the plan. The South Carolina Department of Social Services, not a Member of Congress, is responsible for approving proposals of this type.

“Finally, government transparency and accountability to the public is paramount. While our office does not have a role under the law in the implementation of such a plan, we are interested in providing the community with answers. To that end, we will be following up with the State Department with additional questions regarding local input.”

Gowdy posted the full State Department’s response online.

The response reads in part that Spartanburg would play “an integral role in ensuring that former refugees find a community which they can call home and which they in turn can enrich through their contributions. Key stakeholders such as the local churches in Spartanburg, which provided the impetus to establish this site, are a wonderful example of the support and spirit of the community.”

According to Jason Lee, director of World Relief Spartanburg, a letter signed by about 40 ministry leaders who support resettling refugees here was hand delivered to Gowdy’s district office in Greenville.

“We felt like we were able to enlighten his staff when we met on April 21st,” Lee told the Herald-Journal of Spartanburg.

“You can be a Bible-believing Christian and have one perspective. But as an elected official, you have an obligation to the people who you work for who have legitimate questions about how things will be paid for. They have legitimate questions about access to health care, security questions, educational opportunity questions,” Gowdy told the newspaper.

He said the state approves the resettlement plan, and the U.S. State Department interacts with the contractor agencies.

“Congress has no role whatsoever, but as the member of Congress, it is my job to get answers to questions,” Gowdy told the Herald-Journal.

Jeffrey hopes Gowdy will see his role as providing more than just information, but actual oversight.

“Alexander Hamilton once said that if ever two branches of government should gang up against the American people, the Republic is over,” she said.

The full text of Gowdy’s May 4 follow-up letter to Kerry is reprinted below in full:

Congressman Gowdy | May 4, 2015

The Honorable John Kerry
Secretary
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street, NW
Washington, DC 20520

Dear Secretary Kerry,

Thank you for your response to my April 13, 2015, letter. This issue continues to be important to my constituents, and as their representative in Congress, it remains my job to get complete answers to the legitimate questions raised.

Toward that end, parts of your Agency’s response lacked sufficient specificity. In an ongoing effort to better understand the process and public impact of the proposed resettlement of refugees in Spartanburg pursuant to the resettlement agency’s proposal, several follow-up questions are listed below. I appreciate your prompt, substantive, and specific responses.

To begin, it is important to clarify and correct the timeline of events for the proposal. In your response you stated there were two community meetings, one in August 2014 and one in January 2015. You also stated the proposal was submitted in July 2014 and approved in November 2014. Is this correct? If so, does this mean the resettlement agency had only one community meeting, which occurred after the proposal was submitted and before the State Department’s approval?

1) (a) Who, with specificity, were the “25 other individuals and church representatives”who “expressed their support for the resettlement program in Spartanburg”?

(b) Who specifically was consulted as part of the community and site assessment referenced in the timeline included in the proposal. Please include names and dates of the consultations where possible.

(c) Was anyone directly consulted in the South Carolina Governor’s office other than Dorothy Addison, the State Refugee Coordinator? Who did Ms. Addison talk with as part of the community assessment in order to validate the resettlement agency’s assessment of the community’s ability to support the influx of refugees?

2) After the August 2014 meeting, who provided feedback on the proposal? Was this feedback included in the proposal although it had already been submitted? Which of South Carolina’s United States Senators was contacted and did either provide feedback? Was Congressman Mick Mulvaney, whose district includes a portion of Spartanburg County, consulted?

3) Who were the “care providers” consulted as part of the community assessment? Please provide names and dates of consultations where possible.

4) Who were the local “public school representatives” consulted as part of the community assessment? Please provide names and dates of consultations where possible.

5) With whom did the resettlement agency meet to identify potential housing locations for the refugees? Please provide names and dates of consultations where possible.

6) (a) Is the per capita grant funding from the Department of State guaranteed for as long as there are refugees present?

(b) What happens if the local resettlement agency, World Relief in this case, can no longer offer support services for the resettled refugees? Will the Department of State relocate the refugees? How much funding must the resettlement agency provide each year?

7) According to your response, there are nine refugees who may start arriving in Spartanburg in the next few months. What is the country of origin of each of these nine refugees?

8) (a) What advanced notification will be provided to the community after the “annual proposal process is conducted by PRM” to determine how many additional refugees will be resettled in the Spartanburg area in the coming years?

(b) Must the State Refugee Coordinator sign off on any additional resettlement of refugees?

(c) What individuals will be consulted for the annual proposal?

(d) Who are the stakeholders that will be included in the ongoing community consultations? Please provide names where possible.

9) (a) Who generally will be part of the “Good Neighbor Teams”?

(b) Who will oversee the refugees’ access to public welfare benefits and/or assist them in job searches?

(c) Will this be solely World Relief’s role or will the South Carolina Department of Social Services play a role?

10) (a) What school district representatives did the resettlement agency consult with regarding the effect of minor refugees on Spartanburg’s seven (7) school systems?

(b) Were the discussions with school principals or district superintendents?

(c) Did representatives of the school districts sign off on the resettlement? If so, please provide the names of the individuals.

(d) Precisely who in the Spartanburg school systems told World Relief there is “capacity for more students” in the system’s already existing English immersion programs?

11) For what crimes, if any, can an individual be convicted and still be approved for U.S. refugee status? Do any of the nine refugees you indicated are currently slated for Spartanburg resettlement (or any who have subsequently been selected for resettlement) have such convictions?

12) How exactly are background checks performed on individuals seeking refugee resettlement in the United States? How can the background of an individual who is outside his country of origin be thoroughly investigated? Does the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) have access to background check procedures in the countries of origin of each of the individuals proposed to be resettled in Spartanburg?

13) (a) How do the national resettlement agencies “assess the capacity and environment” to determine the number of refugees a city can resettle? How is a “strong refugee program” quantified?

(b) Who must be included in the community consultation plan? Who is typically consulted in other communities?

(c) Please provide any and all guidance provided to resettlement agencies by USRAP regarding the process that must be undertaken to get to the point of submitting a resettlement proposal, the ongoing process until the time of approval, and how a resettlement proposal should be conducted.

(d) Are local law enforcement officials part of the initial consultation and do they remain so once the resettled refugees are in the community? What, if any, efforts exist to track the refugees’ interactions with local law enforcement officials?

14) How do you ensure long-term accountability on the part of any resettlement agency so the taxpayer is not ultimately left paying for the costs of refugee resettlement proposal?

Thank you in advance for your prompt attention to this matter. This issue remains important to my constituents, and I will continue to work with you to get answers to all their questions.

Sincerely,

Trey Gowdy

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Thatcher Expert: The Iron Lady Would Be ‘Appalled’ By Obama

By Ginni Thomas, Contributor , 03/29/2015

URL of the Original Posting Site: http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/29/thatcher-expert-the-iron-lady-would-be-appalled-by-obama/

Ginni Thomas

Virginia Thomas, 54, is a special correspondent for the Daily Caller producing videos of emerging leaders and educators in the public square. Her ear is to the ground outside the Washington Beltway as a social entrepreneur. Previously, she was the founder of LibertyCentral.org (nonprofit for citizen activists), and has worked at The Heritage Foundation, Hillsdale College’s Washington office, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the senior levels of the legislative and executive branches of government. She has maintained her midwestern authenticity after 30 years in Washington, D.C. and enjoys motor homing and the Nebraska Cornhuskers with her husband, Justice Clarence Thomas. Her degrees are: Business Communication & Political Science from Creighton University, and J.D. from Creighton Law School (Omaha, NE).

A visitor to America might think Democrats won last fall’s election and that Republicans lost. Why? Because, when observers connect the dots, Republicans are on defense, ceding legislative powers to an aggressive executive branch in an unprecedented manner.

Despite electoral losses for his party, President Obama is on offense. He is now testing the radical proposition of having his secretary of state negotiate a nuclear weapons deal with the world’s leading state sponsor of jihadist terror without having the Senate ratify the treaty. How? By naming it an “agreement” rather than a “treaty,” and by seeking its authority through the United Nations rather than Congress.

As Andrew C. McCarthy wrote this month, “It is otherworldly to find an American administration conspiring against the Constitution and the Congress in cahoots with a terror-sponsoring enemy regime, with which we do not even have formal diplomatic relations, in order to pave the enemy’s way to nuclear weapons, of all things.”

Nile Gardiner, the Heritage Foundation’s Director of the Margaret Thatcher Center, calls this development “astonishing” and “imperialistic” in this video interview. “If the British Prime Minister decided to strike a deal with a rogue regime against the wishes of Parliament, that Prime Minister wouldn’t last very long,” Gardiner explains. “There’d be a rebellion and revolt. There’d be a vote of no confidence. That’s the difference in our systems of government.”

Dr. Gardiner praised Sen. Tom Cotton and the 46 Republicans who warned Iran that any deal would not last beyond Obama’s term in office. The Cotton letter has resulted in leftist protests and bizarre calls for his prosecution under the Logan Act as an “act of treason” for trying to restrain President Obama’s and Secretary of State John Kerry’s Iranian negotiations.

Does a country with porous borders still have its national sovereignty? The concept of national sovereignty, according to Gardiner, doesn’t mean much to the left who are in power right now. Rather, they seek governance from supra-nationalist organizations. “Once you allow the United Nations to start dictating U.S. policies, America is no longer a sovereign and free nation.”

Asked for what Margaret Thatcher might say of world affairs, Gardiner ventures to guess, “She’d be pretty appalled at the state of affairs today. She would be warning the free world that the West has to mobilize to face an array of threats — the rise of Islamic militancy in the Middle East and Europe, the specter of nuclear Iran on the horizon and the resurgence of an imperialist Russia. She would have been rallying the leaders of the West to stand up against evil that is rising up.”

Gardiner also discusses Russia’s aggression in Eastern Europe, and the Islamic threat in Europe in this two-part video interview.

WATCH PART TWO:

For more on Gardiner, see his page at Heritage here and his book on Margaret Thatcher here.

Mrs. Thomas does not necessarily support or endorse the products, services or positions promoted in any advertisement contained herein, and does not have control over or receive compensation from any advertiser.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Report: Islamic State harvesting organs from its captives for sale on black market

SPECIAL NOTE FROM JERRY BROUSSARD OF WHATDIDYOUSAY.ORG

I reported on this last year. I am not surprised that it has come around once again. Perhaps it’s because the Leftist media is finally recognizing this overwhelming threat Islamic State is to the world.

By Howard Portnoy on February 18, 2015
URL of the Original Posting Site: http://libertyunyielding.com/2015/02/18/report-islamic-state-harvesting-organs-captives-sale-black-market/#pjpHqZyGMXsQK3JG.99

Far from the JV team, the Islamic State is arguably the most cunning and ruthless terrorist organization to emerge yet. Last June, the group reportedly pulled off the most lucrative bank heist in history, extracting nearly half a billion from the coffers of a bank in Mosul.

Now comes a report that the group is engaged in a far darker practice. From Fox News:

[T]he Iraqi ambassador to the United Nations … asked the Security Council to look into allegations the militants were harvesting the organs of their executions for sale to fund their military operations.

This new claim of ISIS brutality came after an unconfirmed report late Tuesday by the police chief in the town of al-Baghdadi that dozens of people — many reportedly captured Iraqi security forces — were rounded up and burned alive. The town in western Iraq is not far from an air base housing hundreds of U.S. Marines.

Ambassador Mohamed Alhakim told reporters that in the past few weeks, bodies with surgical incisions and missing kidneys or other body parts have been found in shallow mass graves.

“We have bodies. Come and examine them,” he said. “It is clear they are missing certain parts.”

He also said a dozen doctors have been “executed” in Mosul for refusing to participate in organ harvesting.

If the assumptions are correct, the plan is as ingenious as it is grotesque. According to an NBC News investigation, the demand for human organs had far outstripped the supply, with a kidney fetching $30,000 on the black market. A report by the World Health Organization notes one human one human organ is sold illegally somewhere in the world every hour. With an unlimited supply of victims, the IS could be in hose for some time.

Category:

Islamic News

Tagged with:

Blue Christmas: UN Arms Trade Treaty Goes Into Effect Dec. 24th

Posted by Tony Oliva on Nov 11, 2014

URL of Original Posting Site: http://bulletsfirst.net/2014/11/11/blue-christmas-un-arms-trade-treaty-goes-effect-dec-24th/#lZ0eeSJJ1HAdHCj0.99

The United Nations Office of Disarmament Affairs has announced that on Dec. 24th 2014 the UN Arms Trade Treaty will begin it’s enforcement. To refresh your memory on what the UN Arms Trade Treaty actually does:

“The treaty includes export/import controls that would require officials in an importing country to collect information on the ‘end user’ of a firearm, keep the information for 20 years, and provide the information to the country from which the gun was exported. In other words, if you bought a Beretta shotgun, you would be an ‘end user’ and the U.S. government would have to keep a record of you and notify the Italian government about your purchase. That is gun registration. If the U.S. refuses to implement this data collection on law-abiding American gun owners, other nations might be required to ban the export of firearms to the U.S.”

So what will that mean for the United States once this treaty goes into force? Well, thanks to the Obama Administration and John Kerry for signing the most worldwide form of gun control and sovereignty invalidating piece of garbage in history, even if the Senate doesn’t ratify it, the effects will still be extensive.

First and foremost, since the US has a thing about liberty (we love it) and by nature disdains the forfeiture of its own sovereignty as well as creating gun registries, we will not ratify and because we won’t bend a knee, the importation of firearms from other countries will all but evaporate.

Small arms from countries that have ratified the treaty include Germany, Italy, Romania and the United Kingdom and as such will be compelled by international treaty to stop importation of their wares to the United States. Other countries that have signed up and are awaiting ratification include Austria, Belgium, and the Czech Republic; so get ready to say goodbye to your Glocks, Brownings and Czech made AK’s.

Mind you, we’re not just talking about the complete firearms either:

Parties must also regulate export of parts and components that may assemble these conventional arms.

After Christmas, while the conventional model may be to expect a drop in prices, parts for these firearms will undoubtedly go through the roof.

You can thank the Obama administration for this.

This was the “under the radar” methods that Obama was speaking of when he spoke of taking away American’s 2nd Amendment rights. A strong US President who loved his country and the liberty it entails could have easily, as THE World Leader, squashed this entire treaty long before it became a reality.

How do I know this? Because the Small Arms Treaty didn’t start under Obama’s reign, it started WAY back in 1997 by the President of Costa Rica. It languished for ten years until it finally came up for the first time at the United Nations as Resolution 61/89.

153 foreign nations voted for the resolution, 24 abstained and ONE nation stood as the lone vote rejecting the resolution. Which country was this High Noon’s Will Kane? You got it…AMERICA. The Bush administration didn’t side step the issue and abstain, the Bush administration took a stand and said NO.

That ENDED the UN’s plan for global gun control right there and then. With a lone dissenting voice the United States stopped one of the most dangerous measures the United Nations has ever tried to pass.

And don’t undervalue the impact of the United States in stopping it because after the vote, Algeria indicated that the effort must receive broad-based support from states and be based on the principles of the UN Charter.

Broad based support? The resolution had 153 signatures and one dissenter. It’s support was broad based. What Algeria really meant was that: “this resolution cannot go forward without the United States.”

Which was true, until we elected the gun controller in chief with his rabid obsession of disarming his own people.

This is not conjecture, this is a quantifiable action/reaction delineation.

The DAY, September 25th 2013, after Obama had Kerry sign the treaty, 16 other nations signed with three more nations ratifying it immediately. Nearly, 20 nations followed Obama’s lead that day. Three more would sign the following day.

Before the Obama administration signed the treaty only 4 nations in the world ratified it. Once the world saw that the US was willing to go along with it the dam gave way and countries were falling over themselves to follow suit.

So even when the Senate refuses to ratify the Treaty, because of Obama’s willingness to lead the world instead of his country, the firearms industry will be hurt by this treaty. Thereby hurting the American gun owning citizen.

Now, you may be saying, we’ll just build them here in the USA. And we can…or can we?

I direct your attention once again to the following aspect of the treaty:

Parties must also regulate export of parts and components that may assemble these conventional arms.

What actually constitutes a component? A barrel? Sure. A stock? Ok. The steel and wood to make them? Ahhhhhhh.

What about bullets? Well, one could say that lead is also a component and can now banned from importation. Considering that the Obama Administration shut down the last lead smelting plant in America at the end of last year, that could be a very tricky situation for the US.

The US has been shipping manufacturing and textile jobs overseas for so long that we are lacking the capabilities of just picking up and making it ourselves.

Even if we start again, at the very least, prices for firearms and bullets will sky rocket. The UN Arms Trade Treaty will, in effect, create an embargo designed to make the firearm in America go extinct or cow the government to ratify the treaty.

Not a very nice Christmas present for the 2nd Amendment. But on the bright side, after this most recent election the country all but assured that the UN treaty will not be ratified here and that is something.

Let this also be a reminder that in 2 years, when we pick a new President, we vote for one who will not only put the welfare of his own people before the whims of foreign states but also will have the backbone and courage to stand alone if needed.

Because frankly, even if Obama wasn’t so gung-ho of an anti-gunner, he is still a coward and would have kow-towed to the world in order to go along to get along and be liked. Our sovereignty is in jeopardy because our leader has no spine.

Remember that in 2016.

By WhatDidYouSay.org

Category:

International Politics

Tagged with:

‘Master Faith’ or ‘Master Race’?

Tad Cronn — September 30, 2014

Give the man points for calling a spade a spade.

Give him some sympathy for having to say it in front of the U.N., one of the most anti-Israel groups around.

It’s not an idle comparison between modern Islamists and the Nazis, particularly when you start digging into the history of the Muslim Brotherhood, the umbrella group for most of the terrorists in the Muslim world.

A campaign led by the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Muhammed Amin al-Husseini, in the late 1930s against the Jews was sparked by Jewish immigration in the region of Palestine. Al-Husseini, who was an admirer of Hitler, helped establish the Brotherhood as a jihadist organization, growing membership from 800 members to more than 200,000 in a couple of years.

Ties between the Nazis and the Muslim Brotherhood became quite close, with the Brotherhood serving as the Nazis’ right arm in the Mideast. In 1938, Heinrich Himmler sent this telegram message:

To the Grand Mufti: The National Socialist movement of Greater Germany has, since its inception, inscribed upon its flag the fight against the world Jewry. It has therefore followed with particular sympathy the struggle of freedom-loving Arabs, especially in Palestine, against Jewish interlopers. In the recognition of this enemy and of the common struggle against it lies the firm foundation of the natural alliance that exists between the National Socialist Greater Germany and the freedom-loving Muslims of the whole world. In this spirit I am sending you on the anniversary of the infamous Balfour declaration my hearty greetings and wishes for the successful pursuit of your struggle until the final victory. Signed: Reichsfuehrer S.S. Heinrich Himmler

Al-Husseini later wrote in his memoirs that he asked Hitler to give a commission to the Brotherhood “to allow us to solve the Jewish problem in a manner befitting our national and racial aspirations and according to the scientific methods innovated by Germany in the handling of its Jews. The answer I got from the Fuehrer was: ‘The Jews are yours.’”

And so it continues today.

The Allies may have defeated the Nazis in World War II, but in many ways, they failed to defeat Nazism, and it is rising again around the world in various forms, from the Golden Dawn in Greece, to ISIS in Iraq, to a surge in anti-Semitic sentiment in the U.S. and Europe.

During his speech at the U.N., Netanyahu singled out Iran as one of the greatest threats to the rest of the world.

“For 35 years,” Netanyahu said, “Iran has relentlessly pursued the global mission set forth by its founding ruler, Ayatollah Khomeini in these words. ‘We will export our revolution to the entire world until the cry “there is no god but Allah” will echo throughout the world over.’ And ever since, the regime’s brutal enforcers, Iran’s revolutionary guards, have done exactly that. Listen to the current commander, General Muhammed. He clearly stated this goal. He said, ‘Our Imam did not limit the revolution to this country, but to prepare the way for an Islamic world government.’”

As ISIS demonstrates, terrorism is growing more sophisticated about ways of spreading its message. Through social media on the Internet, the same barbarians who behead, crucify and slaughter their enemies both infidel and Muslim, and who kidnap, torture, rape and enslave women are able to draw thousands of recruits from countries that are supposed to be civilized.

We shouldn’t underestimate the appeal of evil. As Pope Francis said just the other day, the devil makes evil look good in order to seduce mankind.

It’s hard to argue against that when you see so many allegedly educated Americans lining up with Islamists against Israel and, ultimately, against themselves.

Category:

International Politics

Tagged with:

Border Patrol Agents: U.N. Taking Control of America’s Southern Border

http://www.infowars.com/border-patrol-agents-u-n-taking-control-of-americas-southern-border/

Under the pretense of labeling illegals “refugees,” U.N. personnel are working with DHS to ship MS-13 gang members into U.S., says agent

by Kit Daniels | Infowars.com | July 23, 2014

Two anonymous Border Patrol agents reportedly told radio host Dave Hodges that under the pretense of labeling illegal aliens “refugees,” the United Nations is “calling the shots” on America’s border operations and the U.N. is deciding which immigrants to ship to various parts of the U.S.

One of the agents said U.N. personnel are already present at various detention facilities in the American Southwest, according to Hodges, and are working with Homeland Security agents in “gathering MS-13 gangsters, captured from different roundups, patch worked together as a group and then shipped together to various locations on the perimeter of the United States.”

“I objected to admitting MS-13 gangsters into the U.S. and I was told that we have our orders to treat them like anyone else,” the other agent told Hodges.

Hodges says that he asked one of the agents how they knew the immigrants were MS-13 and he told him they could tell “by the tattoos.”

“He recounted the fact that MS-13 operatives will have a tattoo with tears on their face which represents a person that they have murdered in the commission of their drug related duties,” Hodges reported. “He said he processed an MS-13 member who had nine tears on his face and he was told to process him as an ‘unaccompanied juvenile refugee.’”

And police officers are already encountering these gang members, such as the La Grulla, Texas, officer who pulled over a vehicle last week carrying an aggressive MS-13 member.

“Once I asked him to lift up his shirt, that’s where I observed he had MS-13 tattooed on his chest and his back,” the officer stated. “Those are really dangerous subjects.”

The U.N., however, has already announced its intent to broadly designate illegal aliens, including MS-13 members from Central America, as “refugees.”

“Representatives of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, or UNHRC, are ‘intensely discussing in meetings’ the possibility of extending U.N. protection to the thousands of Central Americans crossing the U.S. border with Mexico illegally by defining them as ‘refugees’ who are seeking asylum from political and domestic violence in their home nations,” Jerome Corsi reported on July 14 for World Net Daily.

An informed source also told Infowars the U.N. is already calling illegals “refugees” and pro-amnesty organizations are likewise doing so even though Latin America has experienced extreme violence for the past 10 years and the massive influx of illegals has only occurred in the past few months.

In June, for example, several activists who were guests on NPR described all the illegal immigrant youth entering the U.S. in record numbers as desperate “war refugees” who need the full support of the government.

Of course, that’s obviously not the case if the U.N. is helping to import MS-13 gang members into the U.S., but U.N. representatives will still call them “refugees” if it allows the globalist organization to infringe upon America’s national sovereignty.

PLEASE WATCH REPORT BELOW:

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

UN to Set Up a U.S.-based Disarmament Specialist

Written by Joe Wolverton, II, J.D.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/item/18592-un-to-set-up-a-u-s-based-disarmament-specialist<!–
Email
–>

It’s no secret that President Obama and the would-be global governors at the United Nations are anxious to disarm the American people. Now they’re looking to hire some help in getting it done.

From the UN’s Programme of Action and Arms Trade Treaty, to his own executive orders, Obama is pursuing every available avenue toward de facto repeal of the Second Amendment and the God-given right to keep and bear arms that it protects.

“As a reminder; our own Secretary of State, John “the Lurch” Kerry signed America as a cooperating nation in the treaty. Yes, he broke the law doing that because HE DID SO WITHOUT THE HOUSE APPROVAL. But, why should the Obama administration start following the law now?” JB

Over the next few weeks, though, the UN is looking to add personnel to its gun grabbing gestapo. In a job advertisement open until July 26, the UN is looking for a “Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration Officer.”

What will this bureaucrat’s bailiwick be? Here’s a summary of the job description as posted by the UN:

Act as a Focal Point for DDR [Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration] components for 2-3 missions, responsible for planning, support to implementation and evaluation;

Advise, develop and review (as appropriate) initial DDR functional strategy and concept of operations for further development into a full programme by the DDR component and the National DDR Commission;

Provide Headquarters support in planning the civilian and military logistics support for DDR;

Continually review DDR programme strategy and implementation through relevant documents, reports and code cables;

Conduct field missions to assess implementation of established DDR programmes;

Identify potential problems and issues to be addressed and suggest remedies to DDR units in the field; and

Liaise with others (UN, regional organizations [sic] and Member States) providing DDR training.

As if the list of tasks assigned to the disarmament specialist isn’t enough to fire up patriots who own firearms and refuse to have them seized by the UN or the Obama administration, the UN wants to base this office in New York City!

It is more than a little incompatible that a country that places such a high value on gun ownership that it enshrined it in its Bill of Rights participates in an organization that has such disdain and disregard for those rights that it is opening a disarmament office in that country.

Lest anyone think that there’s nothing to fear from this agent of disarmament, consider the definitions of disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration provided by the UN on an information page linked to the job opening announcement:

Disarmament is the collection, documentation, control and disposal of small arms, ammunition, explosives and light and

Click on image to see movie trailer and more

heavy weapons from combatants and often from the civilian population.

Demobilization is the formal and controlled discharge of active combatants from armed forces and groups, including a phase of “reinsertion” which provides short-term assistance to ex-combatants.

Reintegration is the process by which ex-combatants acquire civilian status and gain sustainable employment and income. It is a political, social and economic process with an open time-frame, primarily taking place in communities at the local level.

The objective of the DDR process is to contribute to security and stability in post-conflict environments so that recovery and development can begin. DDR helps create an enabling environment for political and peace processes by dealing with security problem that arises when ex-combatants are trying to adjust to normal life, during the vital transition period from conflict to peace and development.

Notably, the UN will require the DDR specialist to help disarm ex-combatants. Is this mission not an eery echo of recent efforts in the United States to keep veterans from owning firearms? Perhaps, unbeknownst to the American people, President Obama has already been using his infamous “pen” and “phone” to carry out the disarmament of veterans in furtherance of some higher-level UN strategy.

Could it be also that the rapid militarization of local law enforcement in the United States could be another tactic in the piecemeal, surreptitious deployment of “troops” capable of carrying out a forcible forfeiture of firearms?

As reported by the National Rifle Association’s Ginny Simone, there are those on the inside who have raised the warning voice.

Simone reports that in 2012, Ambassador Faith Whittlesey, a U.S. delegate to the UN Small Arms Conference, revealed that the UN’s ultimate goal is to disarm all Americans in the name of global peace and an end to armed violence.

“In New York, right here on our own shores, we’ve got a Trojan horse. They won’t accept U.S. firearms policy,” Whittlesey said. “They want to take the decision away from the U.S. electorate and undermine our Constitution.”

Regardless of the reason, Americans must adamantly refuse to allow the UN to establish an office of disarmament on our own shores. We must demonstrate our ancestors’ zeal for liberty, particularly regarding the fundamental right to oppose tyranny by force of arms.

If we do not, we may soon be subject to the full expression of the authority of the U.S.-based DDR specialist and be left defenseless in the fight against absolutism.

Joe A. Wolverton, II, J.D. is a correspondent for The New American and travels nationwide speaking on nullification, the Second Amendment, the surveillance state, and other constitutional issues. Follow him on Twitter @TNAJoeWolverton and he can be reached at jwolverton@thenewamerican.com .

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

THE SECOND MOST IMPORTANT ARTICLE YOU WILL READ TODAY: The Communist Peace Offensive: The Great Deception

http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/04/the-communist-peace-offensive-the-great-deception/#BKgK3ReU64doOZFm.99

David Risselada 11 hours ago

In a recent article, I discussed something called the communist peace offensive. I highlighted the relationship between our current organizer in chief and the radical tactics of his messiah, Saul Alinsky. While Saul Alinsky claimed to hate the communists for the way they abused their power and slaughtered innocent people, his tactics did none other than secure this type of power for those that implemented them. After all, his admitted objective was the obtaining of power and not letting it go under any circumstances. The belief that the ends justified the means gave those seeking this power the “moral imperative,” because they believe, through their innate “elitism and wisdom,” they can ultimately create a perfect society, to carry their ideology out to its logical conclusion. I also pointed out the relationship between the tactics of Alinsky and amply named “communist peace offensive,” which, in essence, is a decades old plan to convince Americans that their culture and government are responsible for the world’s suffering, and world communism would be the much desired solution in seeking out “peace.”

There is a great deal more to this than can really be explained in one article. There are so many different elements that have contributed to the psychological conditioning that has conned people into accepting totalitarianism as the “new freedom.” For instance, many people do not know that Betty Friedan, the founder of modern day feminism, was a member of the Communist Party and that she deliberately set about teaching women they were oppressed by the patriarchal, male dominated society which sought to subjugate women by keeping them barefoot and pregnant.
Today, one of the core beliefs of the feminists is that the hormone testosterone is responsible for the world’s wars and only by feminizing and dumbing down men can there ever be “world peace.” That’s nothing but communist propaganda folks, and it goes a long way in explaining why we have men running around in pink high tops, putting hair spray in their hair and wearing jeans so tight they can barely walk. The feminist movement has destroyed masculinity, plain and simple.

The sad truth of the situation, however, is that we have been deceived on a grand scale, and much of this deception revolves around the “communist peace offensive.” It is the perfect explanation of the application of Hegel’s dialectic being put in motion by the infiltration of two political parties who play the role of opposition one another, yet are stealthily advancing the vision of Vladimir Lenin and his quest for world socialism.

I am going to draw on two relevant examples, both of which are having a major impact in policy initiatives on a global scale. They are both subjects I have written about extensively, though I feel the need to better define my position and refine my point. These two examples are the United Nations Small Arms Treaty, and the Common Core curriculum. If you have never read any of my articles before, I suggest you sit down because some of this is difficult to digest.

First, I will touch on Common Core. There are few American presidents who have inspired the feelings of pride and patriotism that most conservative Americans feel like Dwight Eisenhower, and Ronald Reagan. The sad truth is that Eisenhower, and then later Reagan, both signed agreements with the Soviet Union that would ensure a smooth transition in forging the two nations into one, communist entity. This is according to Charlotte Iserbyt in her book The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America. Iserbyt was once a senior official in the Reagan Department of Education and her book is more of a paper trail of evidence than anything else. You will have to examine the evidence for yourself and make up your own mind. No one will argue, however, that Common Core education is a deliberate attempt to make our children compliant, global citizens, unable to think for themselves. Reducing America to a pansy state, in the eyes of the communists, is imperative because they have been conditioning people to believe we are the problem and communism is the solution. Education, psychological conditioning, and indoctrination into secular humanism are methods in which we have been “psychologically disarmed.” We are, in theory, only a couple of generations away from a population that would voluntarily get on the trains to their own demise. If you doubt this, just ask your local college students how much they know about the Constitution and American history.
The next point, about the current efforts to disarm America, is equally disheartening as another prominent American president; John F. Kennedy is at the center of attention. Look, whether you are a liberal or a conservative, you would have to be a bonafide idiot not to see what Barrack Obama is doing to our military. Again, this is the communist peace offensive folks.

Remember, one of the 45 communist goals discusses the need to develop the illusion that America’s willful disarmament is a sign of strength. Obama is dismantling our weapons programs folks, and not a whimper about it is being heard. The main point is that the communists would love to see America’s military might dismantled, and the rise of a U.N. military force takes its place. Everything revolves around this, and they have made great progress since President Kennedy signed public law 87-297. This law is called the Arms Control and Disarmament Act and has set in motion the systematic process in which our national leaders have since been dismantling the military.

Here’s the best part; seeing as though the loss of our military will mean the complete loss of sovereignty, the need to disarm the people comes first. Enter the U.N. Small Arms Treaty. Before the final move against our armed forces is made, there will be a move for our firearms. What I see developing is a fabricated threat of nuclear war, and the U.N. posing as the world’s savior, in an attempt to further the “psychological disarming” of the citizenry, and the need to merge the U.S. into one global government. Hey, I’m just a tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorist.

As you can see my friends, the state of affairs in which we currently find ourselves is the culmination of decades of socialist incrementalism. The correct term for this is “Fabian Socialism,” the belief that a culture can be changed by steadily seeking to change values and opinions of an unsuspecting population. Seeing as though America is a society that thrives on entertainment, keeping us distracted with “meaningless nothings” that appeal to our fragile egos, has been an easy thing to do. Some will call me names and attempt to ridicule me. Those who can see what I’m talking about in the very nature of today’s generation, the manner in which they callously disregard what their fathers and grandfathers have fought to secure for them, their entitlement attitudes and their foolish belief that America is what’s wrong with the world, will know I’m right.

About David Risselada

David Risselada is a freelance writer and researcher. David served in the United States Marine Corps from 1995-1999 and the US Army from 2001-2006. In addition to contributing to FreedomOutpost.com, he writes at Radical Conservative.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Ted Cruz criticizes DOJ for arguing international treaty can trump the Constitution

The Obama Administration (Cartel) has looked for every loophole it can find to get around the United States Constitution. According to the following report, they have found the ultimate way. This is more than scary. We have to watch this closely, do the Spiritual Warfare necessary, and speak up to our representatives. We cannot let this become the norm.

Jerry Broussard

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

http://washingtonexaminer.com/ted-cruz-criticizes-doj-for-arguing-international-treaty-can-trump-the-constitution/article/2538205

Ted Cruz criticizes DOJ for arguing international treaty can trump the Constitution

BY JOEL GEHRKE

Justice Department attorneys are advancing an argument at the Supreme Court that could allow the government to invoke international treaties as a legal basis for policies such as gun control that conflict with the U.S. Constitution, according to Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas.

Their argument is that a law implementing an international treaty signed by the U.S. allows the federal government to prosecute a criminal case that would normally be handled by state or local authorities.

That is a dangerous argument, according to Cruz.

“The Constitution created a limited federal government with only specific enumerated powers,” Cruz told the Washington Examiner prior to giving a speech on the issue today at the Heritage Foundation.

“The Supreme Court should not interpret the treaty power in a manner that undermines this bedrock protection of individual liberty,” Cruz said.

In his speech, Cruz said the Justice Department is arguing “an absurd proposition” that “could be used as a backdoor way to undermine” Second Amendment rights, among other things.

The underlying case, Bond v. United States, involves a woman charged with violating the international ban on chemical weapons because she used toxic chemicals to harass a former friend who had an affair with her husband.

Under the Constitution, such an offense would be handled at the state level. In Bond’s case, the federal government prosecuted her under the Chemical Weapons Convention Implementation Act.

That law implements the Chemical Weapons Convention, the international treaty Syrian dictator Bashar Assad is accused of violating in that country’s vicious civil war.

“The problem here is precisely that Congress, rather than implementing the treaty consistent with our constitutional system of federalism, enacted a statute that, if construed to apply to petitioner’s conduct, would violate basic structural guarantees and exceed Congress’s enumerated powers,” according to Bond’s lawyers.

The Judicial Crisis Network’s Carrie Severino said the Bond case could have ramifications for many other issues.

“If the administration is right, the treaty power could become a backdoor way for the federal government to do everything from abolishing the death penalty nationwide, to outlawing homeschooling, to dramatically curtailing the states’ rights to regulate abortion,” she told the Washington Examiner.

The Judicial Crisis Network is a conservative legal activist group.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

UN Declares Another Worldwide War On Biblical Ethics

by Mark Horne // http://lastresistance.com/2862/un-declares-another-worldwide-war-on-biblical-ethics/

The UN is doing something evil. It must be a day that ends in “Y.”

Having already acted as a willing tool of the US State Department Eugenics policy, pretending to endorse the freedom of mothers to murder babies or not (i.e. “abortion rights), while in fact openly bribing and coercing population reduction, this latest move by the United Nations is not that big a deal relatively. It is just one more monstrosity on top of many other monstrosities. Still it is worth noting, since it will surely be used for propaganda purposes in the United States. Fox News reports:

“Amid a surge of anti-gay violence and repression in several countries, the United Nations’ human rights office on Friday launched its first global outreach campaign to promote tolerance and greater equality for lesbians, gays, transgender people and bisexuals. Called Free & Equal, it’s an unprecedented effort by the Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights to change public attitudes around the world on issues that have bitterly divided the U.N.’s own member states.”

In my opinion, this will ultimately prove to be a good thing if the UN pushes this. It will prove to the global world that, no matter how much money and power we possess in the Western world, and no matter what lovely promises we make, that we are a force for evil that needs to be resisted.

In fact, the UN is openly circumventing the will of its constituents and doing the will of a rich minority to brainwash the poor majority:

“Radcliffe said funding for Free & Equal is being provided by outside contributors, and is not reliant on U.N. funds, thus skirting any possible opposition from U.N. members who oppose gay-rights activism.”

Remember, even in Kenya, a country where residents regard President Obama as a kind of Superhero, the Kenyan President, Uhuru Kenyatta, rebuffed Obama’s advocacy of perversion.

What is obvious from the UN campaign is that the organization does not want to spread the idea of libertarian freedom. Nothing in the UN campaign argues that it doesn’t matter to the civil power what sins consenting adults commit in private only between themselves. That may not be the position God wants civil governments to hold, but it would give these countries a plausible reason to stop prosecuting (or persecuting) homosexuals, without being forced to change all their ethical and religious beliefs.

But no, the UN is insisting that Kenyans and Senagalese and South Africans all the rest change their moralities. They must regard sexual preference as an “orientation” and therefore regard its practice as a kind of “civil right.” Rather than simply decriminalization, the UN is going to push for hate crimes laws, re-education, and the entire gamut of social engineering.

The result: the UN is going to intensify animosity and violence against homosexuals. They would rather see that happen than promote any kind of libertarian freedom.

One aspect of the moral blindness of the UN can be seen in their claims about anti-homosexual violence in South Africa:

“South Africa, in contrast, does not criminalize homosexuality and allows same-sex marriage, yet is plagued by extensive anti-gay violence, including frequent rapes of lesbians.”

I’m sure this odious crime is committed all the time against lesbians because lesbians are women and South Africa is notorious for frequent rapes of women. But is there extensive outside funding available for a campaign against rape in general? Nope. They just care about the homosexuals. The UN is taking a country rife with sexual violence of all sorts and using the part that fits their agenda.

This is the final battle, and it is one in which the United States, the real power behind the United Nations, is a force for evil in the world.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Jesse Jackson: Get The UN Involved in the Zimmerman Case

byPhilip Hodges // http://lastresistance.com/2744/jesse-jackson-get-the-un-involved-in-the-zimmerman-case/

The idea of getting the federal Department of Justice involved in what should have remained a local story is preposterous. But Eric Holder announced recently that his department would be opening an investigation and will possibly bring civil rights charges against Zimmerman. We’ll see. Holder may have bitten off more than he can chew, since there isn’t any real evidence that Zimmerman “profiled” Martin because he was black.

As over-the-top as it is, getting the DOJ involved just isn’t enough for some people. Take a look at what Jesse Jackson said:

“Congress must act. And it’s time to call on the United Nations Human Rights Commission for an in-depth investigation of whether the U.S. is upholding its obligations under international human rights laws and treaties.”

All because a jury decided that Zimmerman was not guilty? Earlier, Jackson was complaining that there were no men or blacks on the jury. Only women. White women:

“Well, it was a stretch, trying to avoid the obvious. There was no–you speak of jury of your peers: there was no man on the jury—Trayvon was a black boy—there was no man, no black on the jury. So at least the idea of jury of your peers was a stretch all the while.”

The “jury of your peers” is something that applies to the person being accused of a crime. That would be George Zimmerman. And he was afforded a jury of his peers (except that they were women).

Jackson balks at an “unfair” jury composition, but then says we need to get an international body involved to determine whether or not we’re abiding by international human rights laws. But we are. Zimmerman was given a fair trial. Many argue that he shouldn’t have even been prosecuted in the first place because of a lack of evidence. That doesn’t mean that he was innocent; just that there wasn’t enough to prove one way or the other. That’s another one of those “human rights” that I’m sure Jesse Jackson doesn’t want to bring up in the context of this trial – the presumption of innocence until the accused is proven guilty. Even the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights acknowledges that one.

If the UN doesn’t deliver for Jesse Jackson, I’m sure he can call on the Galactic Republic.

Category:

Law, Society

Tagged with:

UN Small Arms Treaty May Be Signed Under Cover Of Darkness

by Tim Brown

Instead of taking the opportunity to sign the United Nations Small Arms Treaty on Tuesday, the White House has indicated that Barack Obama will sign it sometime before the end of August. This causes some concern as to what type of event the White House is waiting on to exploit the emotions of Americans to gain support for the measure and put pressure on the Senate to ratify it. Many have suggested that the signature will come under cover of darkness, sometime in August, When Congress will not be in town.

Press Secretary Jay Carney said that Obama aims to sign the treaty “before the end of August.” Tuesday was the earliest he could have signed it.

“We believe it’s in the interest of the United States,” he said. “While we look forward to signing the treaty, there are remaining translation issues that need to be resolved.”

The Hill points out,

The National Rifle Association (NRA) opposes the treaty, and the delay would allow Obama to sign the pact during the August doldrums, with Congress out of town.

That time frame appears to validate the concerns of treaty advocates who had worried the administration would wait until the cover of darkness to sign a treaty opposed by a majority of senators.

Rachel Stohl, a senior associate with the Stimson Center, which supports the treaty, said “I think there’s a lot of political hand-wringing going on. They know people are going to be paying attention to this particular issue on this particular day.”

Secretary of State John Kerry released a statement on Monday in which he said the US “welcomes the opening of the Arms Trade Treaty for signature.” He also said that as soon as the process of conforming the official translations is completed satisfactorily, Obama would be looking forward to signing it.

So there needs to be conforming official translations and that, completed satisfactorily. Sounds similar to being ready to sign something that you have no idea what it really says. Obamacare, anyone? Seems like that is the case on an international scale where the treaty has already passed overwhelmingly.

Kerry went on to state:

“The Treaty is an important contribution to efforts to stem the illicit trade in conventional weapons, which fuels conflict, empowers violent extremists, and contributes to violations of human rights. The Treaty will require the parties to implement strict controls, of the kind the United States already has in place, on the international transfer of conventional arms to prevent their diversion and misuse and create greater international cooperation against black market arms merchants. The ATT will not undermine the legitimate international trade in conventional weapons, interfere with national sovereignty, or infringe on the rights of American citizens, including our Second Amendment rights.

We commend the Presidents of the two UN negotiating conferences – Roberto Garcia Moritan of Argentina and Peter Woolcott of Australia –for their leadership in bringing this agreement to fruition. We also congratulate all the states that helped achieve an effective, implementable Treaty that will reduce the risk that international transfers of conventional arms will be used to carry out the world’s worst crimes.”

The Secretary of State made no mention of his boss’ current administration providing thousands of weapons to some of the world’s worst criminals to carry out some of the world’s worst crimes which is still ongoing and has resulted in the deaths of hundreds of Mexican citizens and at least two federal agents.

The Senate has already signed a resolution to not ratify the treaty thanks to the work of men like Senator Mike Lee (R-UT). Also, 130 members of Congress recently sent a letter to both Obama and Kerry opposing the treaty, writing “We strongly encourage your administration to recognize its textual, inherent and procedural flaws, to uphold our country’s constitutional protections of civilian firearms owners, and to defend the sovereignty of the United States, and thus to decide not to sign this treaty.”

The treaty, while be touted by liberals as something that stops guns from falling into the hands of terrorists, is deeply flawed, leaves open the possibility of changes or different interpretations that would only put a stranglehold on the United States. Furthermore, the treaty will have no effect upon governments, such as the Obama administration, that openly and knowingly provide weapons to drug cartels and negotiates support, along with RINOs in the Senate (not mentioning any names here, but at least one’s initials are John McCain (R-AZ)), with enemies of America to arm them.

Ultimately, no matter what we are told by the politicians, it is an attack upon freedom; a freedom we may just have to one day use to stop the growing tyranny.

One other thing to keep in mind. Iran is also one of the countries that the United Nations installed to help police the treaty. Noticeably missing from oversight on the treaty is the United States.

There is not a question of whether Barack Obama will sign the treaty, only when. Timing is key for him and he demonstrated that by putting his support behind the treaty once again within hours of his re-election.

Let’s keep getting the word out that not only should this treaty be opposed, but should be completely removed from the table of consideration so that it cannot be snuck through in a future Congress.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

UN Human Rights Official Says Boston Got What It Deserved

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/04/22/UN-Human-Rights-Official-Says-Boston-Got-What-It-Deserved

by Anne Bayefsky 22 Apr 2013 446 post a comment View Discussion

UN Human Rights Council “expert” Richard Falk has published a statement saying Bostonians got what they deserved in last week’s terror attack. He quotes W.H. Auden to make his point: “to whom evil is done/do evil in return.”

Richard Falk is the UN’s “Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967.” He has held the post since 2008, despite exposure as a 9/11 conspiracy theorist.

In his latest rant, published online on April 21, 2013 by foreignpolicyjournal.com Falk repeats the libel that prior to 9/11 President George W. Bush was seeking a “pretext” for war, and that anything Israel is the opposite of “justice and peace.”

And then he attacks Bostonians head-on. The police action in Boston was a “hysterical dragnet.” Boston’s dead were “canaries” that “have to die” because of America’s “fantasy of global domination.”

Falk explains the attacks as justifiable “resistance.” In his words: “The American global domination project is bound to generate all kinds of resistance in the post-colonial world.”

He minimizes the crime and predicts worse if America doesn’t change its ways to better accommodate the demands of “the Islamic world.” As he puts it: “In some respects, the United States has been fortunate not to experience worse blowbacks, and these may yet happen…”.

For years, Falk has been espousing the worst forms of antisemitism from his UN perch, and for his efforts has been rewarded with repeated opportunities by the Council to lecture others on his world view.

That world view is shared by the 56 member states of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), who only a week ago at UN Headquarters refused to define terrorism unless an exception clause was created for “legitimate struggle.”

The OIC controls the balance of power at the UN’s top human rights body, by holding majorities in both the African and Asian regional groups. Africa and Asia, in turn, control 26 of the 47 seats on the Council. With the backing of the OIC, therefore, Falk has been encouraged and protected.

The Obama administration has long championed the UN Human Rights Council, which it decided to join as one of its first foreign policy moves in 2009. Thanks to the Obama administration, U.S. began a second three-year term on the Council this past January. At the opening of the Council’s most recent session in March, Assistant Secretary of State Esther Brimmer traveled to Geneva to address what she called “this esteemed body.”

There is nothing about a “human rights” body that countenances the likes of Richard Falk that is “esteemed,” and the United States should resign–effective immediately.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

United Nations Passes Gun Control. Registration ALWAYS Leads to Confiscation.

Gun rights advocates fear U.N. treaty will lead to U.S. registry

By David Sherfinski http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/2/un-passes-international-arms-regulation-treaty/?page=all#pagebreak

The Washington Times Tuesday, April 2, 2013

** FILE ** The United Nations building is reflected on the window of the U.S. mission to the U.N. as portraits of American President Barack Obama, left, Vice President Joseph R. Biden, and then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton hang in the lobby, Saturday, Sept. 18, 2010, in New York. (Associated Press)

The U.N. General Assembly on Tuesday approved a sweeping, first-of-its-kind treaty aimed at regulating the estimated $60 billion international arms trade, brushing aside gun rights groups’ concerns that the pact could lead to a national firearms registry in the U.S.

The long-debated U.N. Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) requires countries to regulate and control the export of weaponry such as battle tanks, combat vehicles and aircraft and attack helicopters, as well as parts and ammunition for such weapons.

SPECIAL COVERAGE: Second Amendment and Gun Control

The treaty also provides that signatories will not violate arms embargoes or international treaties regarding illicit trafficking, or sell weaponry to countries where they could be used for genocide, crimes against humanity or other war crimes.

“This is a good day for the United Nations, and a good day for the peoples of the world,” said Australian Ambassador Peter Woolcott, the lead negotiator during the process.

With the Obama administration supporting the final treaty draft, the General Assembly vote was 155-3, with 22 abstentions. Iran, Syria and North Korea voted against the proposal.

U.S. gun rights activists say the treaty is riddled with loopholes and is unworkable in part because it includes “small arms and light weapons” in its list of weaponry subject to international regulations. The activists said they do not trust U.N. assertions that the pact is meant to regulate only cross-border trade and would have no impact on domestic U.S. laws and markets.

One provision requires participating countries to keep records of arms exports and imports, including the quantity, value, model/type, and “end users, as appropriate” for at least 10 years.

Gun record-keeping is a thorny issue in the U.S., where similar questions have stalled a debate over expanding background checks to include all private gun sales.

Second Amendment supporters worry that such records eventually will pave the way for a national firearms registry, currently prohibited by federal law.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott wrote a letter to President Obama on Tuesday saying he would sue to block the treaty if it is ratified. It “appears to lay the groundwork for an international gun registry overseen by the bureaucrats at the UN,” the letter said.

The Senate last month also signaled its aversion, voting 53-46 to oppose the treaty in a nonbinding test vote as part of the budget debate. Eight Democrats joined all 45 Republicans in opposing the treaty.

Sen. Jerry Moran, Kansas Republican, said Tuesday that it made no sense to pass a treaty that will bind the U.S., while Iran, Syria and North Korea will ignore it.

“The U.S. Senate is united in strong opposition to a treaty that puts us on level ground with dictatorships who abuse human rights and arm terrorists, but there is real concern that the administration feels pressured to sign a treaty that violates our constitutional rights,” Mr. Moran said.

White House press secretary Jay Carney said Tuesday that the White House was pleased with the outcome, but “as is the case with all treaties of this nature, we will follow normal procedures to conduct a thorough review of the treaty text to determine whether to sign the treaty.”

Amnesty International and the Arms Control Association hailed the U.N. vote.

Under the treaty, countries must consider whether weapons would be used to violate international humanitarian or human rights laws and facilitate acts of terrorism or organized crime.

“The treaty’s prohibition section, if it were in force today, would prohibit the ongoing supply of weapons and parts and components to the Assad regime in Syria,” said Daryl G. Kimball, executive director of the ACA, a national group that works on arms-control policies.

The American Bar Association released a white paper arguing that the treaty would not affect Second Amendment rights.

The U.N. vote clears the way for countries to add their signatures to the treaty starting June 3. The treaty will take effect 90 days after 50 nations sign it.

Within one year of signing on, each country must submit a report outlining the steps it has taken to comply. But more specifics on the implementation, enforcement and possible punishment for violations of the treaty remain to be seen. Countries have the right to withdraw from the treaty, but are not, as a result, excused from obligations they had while participating.

“This is a very good framework, I think, to build on — it’s fair, I think it’s balanced, and it’s strong. But it’s only a framework,” Mr. Woolcott said. “And it’ll only be as good as its implementation.”

More rule-making is to be delegated to a conference of participating countries, to convene within one year after the treaty goes into effect to review its implementation and consider amendments.

Proponents hoped that the treaty could be ratified by acclamation at a final negotiating conference last week, but Syria, Iran and North Korea objected.

Some abstaining countries, including India and Egypt, said the treaty did not go far enough on its language regarding terrorism or human rights.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Efforts toward Global Gun Control

Keep Your Eye on President Obama and the United Nations and Their Efforts toward Global Gun Control

images-1

If you want to understand the future direction, our world is taking on gun control keep your eye on President Obama and the United Nations. It is no big secret that the United Nations Disarmament Commission would like the world to give up all of our weapons so that international authorities can keep us all safe from the world’s bad actors. President Obama agrees with this global agenda and U.S. participation in the 2013 U.N. Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) negotiations scheduled for March 3, 2013.

Again, no big surprise, since the Obama Administration, in 2009, the year the DOJ launched the “Fast and Furious Operation,” chose to overturn the long-standing Bush Administration policy opposing any U.N. Arms Trade Treaty because it was an infringement on U.S sovereignty, laws and generally just an insanely stupid idea.

Conventional and nuclear weapons disarmament is not a new goal for the United Nations or the Global community. In 2000, the United Nations ramped up its small arms disarmament efforts by holding conferences and committees stressing their goal to “negotiate a robust legally binding instrument to establish common standards for international trade in conventional arms.” What the Obama Administration neglects to tell Americans is that the ATT includes small arms too. The United Nations, by their own admission, is attempting to bring “transparency” to global small arms accumulation and stockpiling of ammunition, by requiring the reporting of—which is now voluntary—all participating nation states arms ownership and sales to the United Nations. I will not bore you with the details; I will simply direct you to the following link (www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/Register/)so that you can educate yourselves on the key players and policy development history that is taking place at the United Nations. Policies that continue to go under reported.

To put it plainly, the United Nations wants a global standard for arms sales and wants to know: who is making, selling, buying, and owning weapons around our world. Not just big stuff like nuclear submarines and fighter jets but small arms like revolvers as well. They would also like those weapons, indelibly marked, and registered so —according to U.N. officials—international investigators can identify the perpetrator of future treaty breaches, violators of international arms laws or the suppliers of weapons that fuel armed conflicts like drug wars and organized crime. They also want the power to monitor the warehousing of and stock piling of small arms ammunition levels they determine to be unsafe. Ammunition they also want marked for tracing purposes.

Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘United Nations’

UN to push religious communities to ‘fully comply’ with human rights law to ’empower’ LGBT+ people

Sounds like more “One World Government” push.

According to the U.N., such practices cannot be “justified” under human rights law. The upcoming report aims to “introduce voices from LGBT-inclusive belief systems” to “better recognize and protect LGBT+ persons’ access to faith and spirituality.”

Share this:

Like this:

BY: KIMBERLY ELLS | AUGUST 23, 2022

SEL Is Key to Achieving the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals

Raising the Next Generation of ‘Global Citizens’

Systemic SEL Digital Curriculum

Share this:

Like this:

Reported By Todd Bensman | DECEMBER 16, 2021

Paying People Who Illegally Enter the United States

Start Tapping U.S. Taxpayers Before You Get There

Spending U.S. Money to Encourage ‘Invasion’

Increasing U.S. Cash Support for Illegal Immigration

Share this:

Like this:

Reported by VARUN HUKERI | GENERAL ASSIGNMENT & ANALYSIS REPORTER | October 07, 2021

Share this:

Like this:

Reported by BEN KEW | 19 Apr 2020

Share this:

Like this:

Reported by Benny Johnson | Reporter At Large | 4:48 PM 01/02/2018

Ambassador Nikki Haley said Tuesday that the U.S. is taking its first move to punish the countries that opposed moving its embassy in Israel to Jerusalem. Those countries, it seems, will not be invited to a party America is throwing.

“The United States is asked to do a huge amount around the world, and we are happy to do that. But we expect to be treated respectfully in return.”

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

January 6, 2017 By Kirsty Jane

The House Freedom Caucus, a group of conservative congressmen, are due to meet next week to decide between two possible proposals for the new law.

Share this:

Like this:

By Bethany Blankley September 7, 2016

Obama has once again broken federal law by instructing the U.S. Dept. of Commerce to relinquish U.S. control of the Internet’s Domain Name System to a ‘privatized’ international body, which will take place on October 1, 2016.

Call your senators: 202-224-3121.

Tell them to pass S.3034,“Protecting Internet Freedom Act.”

The United Nations and other countries have no authority to control access to information and eliminate Americans’rights protected by the First Amendment.

Obama broke the law. Americans have a constitutional right to free speech and freedom of the press.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Bethany Blankley

Share this:

Like this:

Authored by Mac Slavo — June 30, 2016

Call it conspiracy theory, coincidence or just bad luck, but any time someone is in a position to bring down Hillary Clinton by testifying they wind up dead. In fact, there’s a long history of Clinton-related body counts, with scores of people dying under mysterious circumstances.

The New York Post’s Page Six reported that after Ashe was found dead Wednesday, the U.N. claimed that he had died from a heart attack. Local police officers in Dobbs Ferry, New York, later disputed that claim, saying instead that he died from a workout accident that crushed his throat.

Adding to the mysterious nature of Ashe’s death was the fact that he had been slated to be in court Monday with his Chinese businessman co-defendant Ng Lap Seng, from whom he reportedly received over $1 billion in donations during his term as president of the U.N. General Assembly.

And then there was this: During the presidency of Bill Clinton, Seng illegally funneled several hundred thousand dollars to the Democrat National Committee.

Source: The Conservative Tribune via The Daily Sheeple

Excerpt via Zero Hedge:

BYRNE: I feel so strongly that people need to know the real Hillary Clinton and how dangerous she is in her behavior. She is not a leader. She is not a leader.

SEAN: She does not have the temperament?

BYRNE: She doesn’t have the temperament. She didn’t have the temperament to handle the social office when she was First Lady, she does not have the temperament.

SEAN: She’s dishonest.

BYRNE: She’s dishonest, she habitually lies, anybody that can separate themselves from their politics and review her behavior over the past 15 years…

Share this:

Like this:

By Paul Bedard (@SecretsBedard) • 4/25/16

In a move around the standard refugee settlement process in America, the United Nations and the administration are scheming to find other ways to boost the number of Syrians entering the country, from 10,000 this year to possibly 200,000.

— Increasing the number of resettlement and humanitarian admission places.

— Easing family reunification and increase possibilities for family reunion.

— Providing scholarships and student visas for Syrian refugees.

— Removing administrative barriers and simplify processes to facilitate and expedite the admission of Syrian refugees.

— Using resources provided by the private sector in order to create labor mobility schemes for Syrian refugees.

Share this:

Like this:

Reported by Michael Bastasch; 02/09/2016

Share this:

Like this:

Published : 21 Nov, 2015

The United Nations has called the states to fight “a global and unprecedented threat to international peace and security” which is Islamic State (IS, ISIS/ISIL, Da’esh). All 15 members of the UN Security Council voted to adopt the French-proposed resolution.

Syria’s UN Ambassador, Bashar Ja’afari, hinted prior to Friday’s vote that this resolution was long overdue. “Welcome to everybody who finally woke up and joined the club of combating terrorists.”

Share this: