Uprising Against U.N. Grows in States and Congress

NewsMax.com ^ | Wednesday, March 3, 2004 | Wes Vernon

[RickofEssex]

Uprising Against U.N. Grows in States and Congress

WASHINGTON – Threats to U.S. security and sovereignty in recent years have spawned a widening grassroots movement to get the United States out of the United Nations and the United Nations out of the United States. The effort has gained a political respectability it did not always enjoy. A “people’s rebellion” against internationalist elites is coming straight from Heartland America.

Once relegated to the outer fringes of the conservative movement, skepticism of and hostility to the U.N. in recent years are the result of several factors, not the least of which is concern for safety in an increasingly dangerous world.

The war against terror in general, and against Saddam Hussein’s Iraq in particular, have caused debate over America’s once assumed right to defend itself without seeking “permission” from the so-called “international community.”

President Bush has been ridiculed in the halls of the United Nations for taking seriously his No. 1 constitutional duty: to protect Americans from harm. Sept. 11 was the wake-up call that brought Americans face to face with the prospect of personal danger. They do not take kindly to U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan and others who challenge our right to self-defense.

Legislatures in some of the same Rocky Mountain states that rebelled against the excesses of the elitist “environmental” movement a quarter of a century ago are now leading the anti-U.N. charge.

The Utah House of Representatives last month approved a resolution urging Congress to withdraw the U.S. from the United Nations.

The measure had been proposed a year ago, but was put on hold while President Bush was unsuccessfully seeking U.N. backing for an invasion of Iraq.

Now in 2004, the Utah House voted 42-33 in favor of “freeing the nation from a large financial burden and retaining the nation’s sovereignty to decide what is best for the nation and determine what steps it considers appropriate as the leader of the free world in full control of its armed forces and destiny.”

The measure has divided the top leadership of the Republican majority in the Utah House.

House Speaker Marty Stephens, who is also a gubernatorial candidate in the Beehive State, voted with the majority, reflecting a popular concern among some conservatives over such issues as “world government” and a global tax.

On the other hand, House Majority Leader Greg Curtis voted against the measure, saying, “I don’t want it to be said, ‘Well, he must not be a conservative, he must not be a true Republican if he doesn’t support this.'”

That Curtis would be defensive about his GOP credentials because of this issue reflects the political reality that the world organization’s approval among the general public, particularly among Republican voters in the 2000 “red states,” has taken a dive in recent years.

The tarnished reputation of the U.N. persists despite the left-tilting establishment’s best efforts to define the issue as something that is “settled” and beyond the boundaries of reasonable debate. But the ranks of the skeptics are growing. Similar anti-U.N. efforts are under way in the legislatures of neighboring states Idaho and Arizona.

On Jan. 17, the chief congressional proponent of the anti-U.N. effort, Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, visited Salt Lake City to outline his case for America’s sovereign right to assert its best interests over whatever objections United Nations might have.

Gains in Congress

Last year, Paul’s campaign to free the U.S. of U.N. constraints made a significant leap forward in Congress, though it still lost by a comfortable margin.

In contrast to previous up or down votes on the issue that netted fewer than 40 supporters, a recorded vote on this issue on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives on July 22, 2003 garnered 145 votes: 141 Republicans and four Democrats.

Rep. Paul sees that as progress. The final vote against the proposal was 279-145. But just as the left has attained ultimate victories by revisiting its issues year after year, so too does the Texas lawmaker intend to apply the same strategy here.

Paul's spokesman Jeff Deist told NewsMax.com that timing was of the utmost significance in this latest vote. The proposal picked up support because of resentment over the anti-U.S. rhetoric in the U.N. General Assembly, which intensified with the run-up to the war with Iraq. Also, unlike previous measures, this vote, on an amendment to an appropriations bill, merely called on the U.S. to cease all funding for the United Nations. It stopped short of calling for outright withdrawal. The idea is to advance the cause in steps.

Included among those favoring Paul's amendment were such heavy hitters as House Majority leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas; House International Relations Committee Chairman Henry Hyde, R-Ill.; and Rep. Christopher Cox, R-Calif., best known for his bipartisan probe several years ago of communist China's espionage in the U.S.

The resentment against the United Nations did not develop in this country overnight. It has been building up for years. NewsMax has been following that every step of the way. We’ll take a closer look next in our second of two installments.

[bulldogs]

I wish this thing would catch fire. Screw Koffi and his communist buddies.

[Vigilanteman]

Haiti would be a splendid place to relocate the United Nations. Even the French would support us on such a move. What's more, all those do-nothing diplomats with their platinum charge cards could help employ the natives driving taxis, waiting tables and printing documents.

[DakotaGator]

The tarnished reputation of the U.N. persists despite the left-tilting establishment’s best efforts to define the issue as something that is “settled” and beyond the boundaries of reasonable debate.

Membership in the UN is never "settled". It is a voluntary association that can be unilaterally severed anytime a member nation feels the organization is not worth a fart in a typhoon.

We should; cease funding the UN, apply the full force of law to their "diplomats'" arrogance (they may have immunity, but their illegally parked vehicles do not), and serve notice we are restoring U.S. sovereignty over they property they occupy.

Let the UN set up in subsahara Africa or France. It has long since ceased being a forum for reasoned discourse among civilized nations.

[cripplecreek]

When in the course of human events.........

[ServesURight]

IMO, Bush lost the perfect opportunity to withdraw the U.S. from the UN when he tried to get U.N. support to invade Iraq.

It was good that he went to the U.N. first - it exposed the U.N. as a bunch of globalist, money-grubbing hand-wringers with a love for dictatorship regimes.

Since the U.N. treaty was not ratified by the U.S. Senate, the President can simply issue an executive order stating that the U.S. will cease operations and pull out in 60 days.

[ARCADIA]

The UN is just an expensive cover for our "political leadership." The faster we get rid of it, the sooner we can restore accountability for our international politics.

[supercat]

We should; cease funding the UN, apply the full force of law to their "diplomats'" arrogance (they may have immunity, but their illegally parked vehicles do not), and serve notice we are restoring U.S. sovereignty over they property they occupy.

In Madison, WI, vehicles parked in city towaway zones would not be impounded unless the owner had outstanding tickets; they'd instead be moved somewhere so as to be parked legally.

Even if NYC couldn't collect any tickets from diplomats or impound their vehicles, what about simply having their tow people provide a friendly service to the diplomats by relocating their vehicles so as to be legally parked?

NYC might not get any direct revenue from such towing, but I'm sure there are some people who would be more than happy to have diplomats' cars towed into their neighborhoods. And I think diplomats would pretty quickly decide that they really didn't want to get their cars towed there.

[NonValueAdded]

ping

[DakotaGator]

Even if NYC couldn't collect any tickets from diplomats or impound their vehicles, what about simply having their tow people provide a friendly service to the diplomats by relocating their vehicles so as to be legally parked?

I like this plan!

[millefleur]

"Haiti would be a splendid place to relocate the United Nations... " quoting Vigilanteman

Great idea !

[Mikey]

"The United Nations gun-grabbers don't care about our Constitution and they don't care about national sovereignty. The UN always wants to expand its power, and global gun control goes hand-in-hand with global government. Every American who cares about the 2nd Amendment should oppose this latest UN attempt to dictate our domestic laws. There is no question that the UN ultimately seeks to impose worldwide gun control, although it has no legal or moral authority to do so."

--Rep. Ron Paul
1-888-322-1414

[McGavin999]

Haiti would be PERFECT! Let's take a vote.

[230FMJ]

The U.N. has to confiscate the guns of all citizens. How else can they make the world safe for Marxism?

[Think free or die]

"I'm sure there are some people who would be more than happy to have diplomats' cars towed into their neighborhoods"

Sounds about right to me!

[HiramAbiff]

Kofi should come over to my house and try and foist his hell-spawned political outlook on me. I'll show him a "peace keeping" force.

[Sen Jack S. Fogbound]

"Haiti would be a splendid place to relocate the United Nations. Even the French would support us on such a move. What's more, all those do-nothing diplomats with their platinum charge cards could help employ the natives driving taxis, waiting tables and printing documents."

What a splendid idea!

[o_zarkman44]

The UN still stands for the United Nobodys.
Without the Dozen nations contributing the majority of it's funding, the status and contributions of the rest of the world amount to next to nothing. And we have next to nothing to show for the money wasted on the a$$wipes of the world except complaints we aren't giving enough.

Get the US out of the UN now!

[TigersEye]

I wonder if they will look at the Law of the Sea Treaty in their next installment?

John Kerry’s Treaty - Outsourcing sovereignty

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Richard Lugar brought the treaty to a unanimous favorable vote and promises to try to get the Senate to act on it "as soon as possible."

That is precisely what Sen. Lugar is trying to do. He has: prevented critics from testifying before his own committee; kept other committees from being briefed on the treaty; and is seeking to get it to the Senate floor before effective opposition can be organized and expressed.

U.S. adherence to this treaty would entail history's biggest and most unwarranted voluntary transfer of wealth and surrender of sovereignty.

These include the power to: regulate seven-tenths of the world's surface area, levy international taxes, impose production quotas (for deep-sea mining, oil production, etc.), govern ocean research and exploration, and create a multinational court to render and enforce its judgments.

The treaty effectively prohibits two functions vital to American security: collecting intelligence in, and submerged transit of, territorial waters.

[ovrtaxt]

Haiti would be a splendid place to relocate the United Nations.

Man, that's just brilliant!! I wish I had thought of it.

[Paulus Invictus]

Yeabut yeabut, yeabut...Sen. Kerry loves the UN and wants to turn our nation over to Kofi et al. This should be a salient point in Bush's campaign ads.

[Mikey]

Agenda 21

International Criminal Court

Bio-chips

United Nations One World Religion

U.N. Would Rule World’s Children

After clicking on and studying the above links, one has to ask. WHAT TOOK SO DAMN LONG?

[Frohickey]

Woohoo!!! Ron Paul!!! Woohoo!!!

Go Ron!

[TigersEye]

Check the link in post #19. The LOST Treaty is being fast tracked for ratification now not sometime in the future.

[Lancey Howard]

I love NewsMax.
Nice work, Carl!

[hedgetrimmer]

I checked the Library of congress and can't find reference to the treaty. Do you know bill numbers or anything that might help?

[Mikey]

"Haiti would be a splendid place to relocate the United Nations..."

HELL would be more appropriate

[SevenDaysInMay]

Write them tickets and tow their cars.

That'll show 'em.

If we're lucky, some of the towed cars will be ones that have dirty bombs and plague dispensers in them, with other diplomatic pouches containing counterfeit US currency from Iran.

[Paul C. Jesup]

Membership in the UN is never "settled". It is a voluntary association that can be unilaterally severed anytime a member nation feels the organization is not worth a fart in a typhoon.

That is exactly what the South thought over a 140 years ago and we all know what happened afterwards.

[John Lenin]

Don't expect Bush to leave the U.N., I sure don't.

[philetus]

ou should know that the UN:

* Wants control of your child
* Wants the Armed Forces of the United States
* Wants to Disarm America
* Wants to implement a global tax that - as usual - Americans will pay the lion's share of
* Wants to take your land
* Is the number one sponsor of terrorism on the planet

[TigersEye]

I'm afraid I don't. Do treaties have bill numbers? The author is very credible and very much in the loop on national security issues and on the radio today he sounded like this was flying so low under the radar that he had just found out about it.

[philetus]

Read the End United Nations tyranny inside the U.S. Petition



http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/petition-sign.cgi?glg

[hedgetrimmer]

Treaties get incorporated into American law when Congress approves and the president signs off on laws based on the treaties.

The Migratory Bird Act of 1978 was based on a United Nations Conference on migratory birds. It really gave teeth to the Endangered Species Act and is one of the underlying laws used to confiscate private property in the name of an animal, bug or plant.

The US code is Migratory Bird Treaty Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 703 and 707. Researching it back you should be able to find links to the UN conference and the treaty.

I can also tell you that the UNs Montreal protocol has been incorporated into law, and its effect is the ban on the use of methyl bromide in United States agriculture. You can trace this ban directly back to a UN treaty. This ban is aimed only at developed countries and will hurt the US and US agriculture more than any other country. In fact this treaty seems aimed solely at harming US agriculture because countries like China do not have any limitations place on the use of methyl bromide at all.

So, will it be easy to find the bill they are going to sneak the treaty into? No. It is made difficult and disguised so people won't know. But it can be done. You may have to experiment with different search criteria in the library of congress, or if possible call your congressman or another knowledgeable congressman who can help you find the bill number.

Good luck and please try to find it. There are lots of people who will want to know about this plan.

[farmfriend]

I have an easier way. All the documentation you need on the founding of ESA in treaties is well researched and laid out in a single source. You just have to buy the book.

[RippleFire]

bump

[Carry_Okie]

So why is Frist trying to sneak through the Law of the Sea Treay under the unanimous consent calendar?

[Carry_Okie]

The US code is Migratory Bird Treaty Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 703 and 707. Researching it back you should be able to find links to the UN conference and the treaty.

It's nothing compared to the Convention on Nature Protection, passed in 1941, which was ratified before there was a UN. Anyone who thinks there wasn't a conspiracy involved should note that the treaty was passed with no recorded votes in either committee or the full Senate, no record of any debate, and was described to the Senate in a cover letter in a manner that falsified its scope (thank you Cordell Hull). The treaty was not attached to the ESA until 1983, if memory serves.

[TigersEye]

Thank you, hedgetrimmer, your advice is much appreciated and good. I just exhausted thomas.loc.gov in search of this committee and/or treaty. No luck.

farmfriend, while I wouldn't argue that ESA is an abomination my search is for what is happening with the Law of the Seas (LOST) treaty. The ramifications of it will make ESA seem like some nuisance "helmet law." See the article linked in post #19.

[DakotaGator]

That is exactly what the South thought over a 140 years ago and we all know what happened afterwards.

LOL! I was wondering when someone would make that comparison.

Difference is the South attempted to secede from a sovereign nation which had assets, such as; people, money, territory, armed forces, etc. The UN has nothing and is nothing.

For an organization created to impove the lot of humanity through statesmanship, all the UN has done is protect barbarism. Charles Hill recently had a fine article on the fate of the UN published in the Hoover Digest. It can be found here:

We Just Saved the UN: What For?

Enjoy.

[Paul C. Jesup]

Difference is the South attempted to secede from a sovereign nation which had assets, such as; people, money, territory, armed forces, etc. The UN has nothing and is nothing.

Do no be so quick to dismiss the U.N. Most of the member of the U.N. loath the U.S. and would love for a reason to openly attack us. Plus we have our own military forces streched very thin throughout the world.

[Paul C. Jesup]

Difference is the South attempted to secede from a sovereign nation which had assets, such as; people, money, territory, armed forces, etc. The UN has nothing and is nothing.

Do no be so quick to dismiss the U.N. Most of the members of the U.N. loath the U.S. and would love for a reason to openly attack us. Plus we have our own military forces streched very thin throughout the world.

[hardhead]

Maybe we should be 'warm' toward the UN?

[knighthawk]

Now in 2004, the Utah House voted 42-33 in favor of “freeing the nation from a large financial burden and retaining the nation’s sovereignty to decide what is best for the nation and determine what steps it considers appropriate as the leader of the free world in full control of its armed forces and destiny.”

No more UN for US-list

If people want on or off this list, please let me know.

[BARLF]

Thanks knighthawk......The word is spreading, no more UN for the US.

[knighthawk]

Yeah, let them go to France.

[lakey]

Included among those favoring Paul's amendment were such heavy hitters as House Majority leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas; House International Relations Committee Chairman Henry Hyde, R-Ill.; and Rep. Christopher Cox, R-Calif., best known for his bipartisan probe several years ago of communist China's espionage in the U.S.

Oh, yeah, I vaguely remember Chris Cox's "bipartisan probe" - that big, long report that never was opened for public perusal. Wasn't that around the time that Newt Gingrich resigned as Speaker, someone else stepped in for a short while, then we got that marvel of brilliance, Hastert?

[TigersEye]

It doesn't seem like the Senate is really all that eager to dump the UN:

Law of The Sea By Dark of Night

Global nightmare: Saving the LOST

John Kerry’s Treaty - Outsourcing sovereignty

[TigersEye]

Have you seen these stories I've linked in post #48?

[jslade]

U.S. out of the U.N. A communist institution. Represented by dictators around the world. Kick them out of New York. The U.N. was sckewed against the U.S. from the beginning. Out of here! And pay your parking tickets.!