Interesting mention of "global governance" at the U.N.

[Longshot]

This link is from freedom.org:
http://www.sovereignty.net/p/clim/hague1100/henry-4.html

<Tinfoil mode on>

The U.N., via the Kyoto Protocol environmental treaties (one of Gore's pet projects) intends to control emissions from automobiles, etc. It also intends to enforce the rules set forth by the treaty.

As a side note, I fail to see how any halfway intelligent UAW member could vote for Gore if he/she knew about the effects this treaty will have on automakers.

Anyway, to the point. Jacques Chirac, President of France, among others, is very angry at U.S. hesitancy to adopt these standards. We resist because we don't want to be accountable to other governments for our actions. We resist because we value our sovereignty.

If you listen to the sound files (translated to English) on the website, you will hear his comments, which are reflective of a greater world view. It's not really black helicopter stuff anymore. The last few minutes of part three are the most interesting. If you have time, listen to the whole thing. The undertones are there to be heard by anyone who is suspicious of the U.N. and its motives. First make the rules, then enforce them.

On another note, I understand that Iraq will soon only accept Euros for purchase of oil. I am sure the others will follow. One world currency? Maybe not so farfetched after all.

<Tinfoil mode off>

How is this gun related? The U.N. is big on world health issues. To them, our guns are a health hazard. Regulation is the answer. Incrementalism is the keyword here.

Comments, flames, and therapist referrals welcome.

 

[Nightcrawler]

you're not crazy

The UN is run by a bunch of socialists and one-worlders, and always has been. Look at the guys that founded it. IF they would stop their infighting and really concentrate on their would-be policies, they'd be downright dangerous. But as is, they're rather incompetent.

Just go to the UN Website and look up the stuff that was supposed to happen at the Millennium Summit a couple months ago to see what I mean. I don't know what, if anything, actually came out of that summit, but some things they WANTED were a global tax on the international exchange of currency (would've generated over one TRILLION US dollars annually), a "Rapid Deployment Force" (Blue-helmeted UN military) and basically, more power. But, as I said, I don't know what, if anything, was actually accomplished at that summit. The Media absolutely ignored it, so who knows?

 

[Jeff Thomas]

There are definitely international anti-self defense implications

BASIC ( http://www.basicint.org/ ), for example, is pushing international ammunition controls.

And, the IANSA ( http://www.iansa.org/ ) is very big on disarming all of us. They're the people who want to encourage more disarmed 'safe' areas. You remember ... like the ones that worked so well in the former Yugoslavia?

Great idea. Gather thousands of civilians together, disarm all of them, tell them you'll protect them, and ... voila! Leave them defenseless when the barbarians arrive. Seems to work great for NATO and the UN. And, the barbarians even clean up the mess.

Disgusting? Nauseating? You bet. Disarming honest, decent people and leaving them defenseless is a disgusting sin. We better learn from these fools - their international efforts at 'gun control' have always been disastrous failures, and if you take the long view of history ... have killed millions.

Really ... spend a little time on the IANSA site. It is an eye opener.

Regards from AZ

 

[Chaingun]

I have heard this somewhere, the U.S. gives 10 billion dollars a year to the UN. The next closest country gives almost 1 billion. From this alone, we should have some very strong political clout, yet the UN always promotes global socialism and global laws. Our constitution is never considered as a guide. Is it the fault of our representatives, or is our government supporting this agenda (those Klinton years)?

In addition, the leader of the UN is always from a third world country, whose own government is typically socialist, and is considered stable if it has survived for a dozen years.

The UN is not a game, should be around for many more years, and we need to set their agenda straight or remove all funding.