Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

John Bolton vs. the 'One Worlders'
NewsMax ^ | 4/11/05 | Wes Vernon

Posted on 04/11/2005 5:22:15 PM PDT by wagglebee

Every time the left finds one of its ideas discredited, it seeks to change the language or name. That is evident in the current attempt by world government advocates to derail the nomination of John Bolton to be ambassador to the United Nations.

When socialism was widely discredited in this part of the world, it became "liberalism." This was Orwellian doublespeak since "liberalism" in the 19th Century meant freedom for the individual from oppressive regulation.

Now that "liberalism," in its current incarnation has been rejected at the polls and elsewhere, we are told we must refer to the left as "progressives." This is another instance of turning the language on its head since it is the left that is demanding rigid adherence to the status quo on issues ranging from Social Security reform to school choice to tax reform to changes at the United Nations. That hardly amounts to "progress."

Now comes the leftist fight against the nomination of the pro-American, straight-talking John Bolton to be the new ambassador to the U.N. Remember the World Federalist Association? Well, it's back. Normally, a group which over the years has built a conspicuous reputation for advocating world government would be leery of placing ads around the country against Bolton lest they backfire.

Not to worry; another word game comes to the rescue. The World Federalist Association (WFA) is now operating under its new name, Citizens for Global Solutions (CFGS), and has been placing ads opposing Bolton, arguing that he has been most undiplomatic in criticizing the United Nations.

One of several signed letters circulated by conservatives and addressed to the Senate points out that the current director of the strategic planning and communications for CGFS, Harpinder Athwal, has affirmed as recently as March 31 that her organization favors world government. Ms. Athwal, by the way, serves as a member of "the far left British Liberal Democrat Party," America's Survival notes. The letter, researched by Cliff Kincaid, is heavily footnoted.

Which raises another question: Given that surveys have shown the American people's confidence in the United Nations at an all-time low (37% in one poll) what is wrong with having an ambassador representing American interests at the United Nations rather than the other way around? If a British subject can attempt to whip up popular protest urging our U.S. Senate to take action against a nominee of our elected president, why is it so impolite that an American should represent American interests at the U.N?

When President Bush sent Condoleezza Rice to the State Department, he knew she would represent his policies rather than getting caught up in the conventional wisdoms of the careerists of the foreign service, many of whom have spent so much of their adult lives listening to so many voices around the world they have lost sight of that which is in the best interests of the United States. It thus follows that the president would also want a U.N. ambassador who does not cringe at the first hint of disapproval from some terrorist nation or third world dictatorship.

Many people who join organizations such as the World Federalists aka Citizens for Global Solutions have been sincerely motivated by a desire for world peace. The problem is history has shown time and again that true peace results from strength. That is how Ronald Reagan ended the Cold War.

As Bolton has pointed out in a Cato Institute study on the U.N., prior to the Reagan 80s, "anti-western and anti-American U.N. General Assembly Majorities regularly and enthusiastically trashed our values."

After Reagan had cut U.N. funding, withdrew from UNESCO, demanded reform at the world body, and in other ways let it be known that America — the U.N.'s largest contributor - intended to represent its best interests, President George H.W. Bush ultimately was able to use the United Nations to cooperate in the Gulf War of 1991.

Yet another letter, signed (at last count) by 84 organizations, reminded the Senate that the U.N. charter itself, "not to mention the Universal Declaration of Human Rights," guarantees "freedom and fundamental human rights, yet ruthless persecution, imprisonment of the innocent, and mass genocide prevail globally. The U.N. must address these problems, and John Bolton is the envoy most able to carry that message."

Furthermore, the letter-writers point out, Bolton "has spent his career standing for fundamental, liberties, freedoms, and the Rule of Law." Former Senator Jesse Helms-chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations committee until his retirement, described John Bolton as "the kind of man with whom we would want to stand at Armageddon."

This letter was signed by (among many others),the Coalitions for America (Paul Weyrich), Family Research Council (Tony Perkins), Concerned Women for America (Beverly LaHaye), Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute (Austin Ruse), Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Campaign (Dr. Richard Land), Eagle Forum (Phyllis Schlafly), and America's Future (Gen. John Singlaub). Space constraints prevent us from mentioning the many others who signed on to this, but they are all recognized for their concern for human liberties.

One can think of examples of the kind of issues on which a confirmed U.N. Ambassador John Bolton would stand tall for the stars and stripes (and if that sounds jingoistic, bear in mind that every other nation in that Tower of Babel on the East River looks out for what it perceives to be in its best interest. Only the United States gets a "tsk tsk" from the elites if it dares to do likewise).

One example is the International Criminal Court (ICC) which President Bush refused to join because he had good reason to suspect that Americans might be railroaded into jails far from these shores at the whim of some foreign judge who would not accord them the basic fair protections afforded suspects here.

One letter to the Senate points out that William Pace, executive director for the World Federalist Movement, with which CFGS is affiliated, has "savagely attacked the U.S. for attempting to shield Americans from prosecution at the ICC."

The communication adds that Pace "is also Secretary-General of the Hague Appeal for Peace, a group whose president, Cora Weiss, gained notoriety for organizing anti-Vietnam War demonstrations for traveling to Hanoi to meet with communist leaders."

President Bush also refused to endorse the Kyoto "global warming" treaty because it could lead to tossing over a million Americans out of work based on an unproven theory. An Ambassador Bolton would likely look at that with a jaundiced eye, as well.

And he would demand an accounting for such doings as the oil-for-food scandal which lined the pockets of some of our so-called "allies," and involved U.N. officials. And he would stand for American interests in demanding to know why the United Nations would not live up to its own humanitarian resolutions, as when it talked big, but backed down on confronting the totally inhumane and aggressive actions of Saddam Hussein.

It is probable that Bolton would ask why the United States should continue to be the largest donor to the U.N. peacekeeping forces in Africa which stand accused of about 150 instances of abuse, including pedophilia, rape and prostitution. The U.N.'s "zero tolerance" policy against "crimes of humanity" rings hollow when followed by "zero compliance" and "zero enforcement."

Nor would he likely sit idly by if Kofi Annan were to wash his hands of such wrongdoing - as when he warned the commander of the peacekeeping force in Rwanda not to get involved in preventing the massacres there. "You should make every effort not to compromise your impartiality or to act beyond your mandate, but may exercise your discretion to do so should this be necessary for the evacuation of foreign nationals."

As noted above, Bolton - who most recently has served honorably as assistant secretary of state for international organizations and as undersecretary of state for arms control and international security — is not the least bit bashful about speaking his mind on U.N. shortcomings.

He has demurred on using the old carrot-and-stick policy to get outlaw nations into line with basic decency. "I don't do carrots," he said.

Bolton has mused aloud that if the 38-story U.N. building were to lose ten stories, "it wouldn't make any difference." It is hard to argue that this is an over-the-top figure of speech, especially given that former U.N. Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali, when asked how many employees worked at the U.N., responded with tongue firmly planted in cheek, "About half."

Bottom line: We have a golden opportunity here to have an intelligent, thoroughly honest and well-qualified icon of the America spirit represent us at the United Nations. Arguably he is the best since Jeanne Kirkpatrick. It would be scandalous if the Senate were cowed into rejecting him.

You may be hearing news reports that Bolton's confirmation is "expected." We would like to think so, but that could lead to a false sense of complacency. The left machinery is working overtime to deny us the representation to which we are entitled. Senators need to hear from you.

TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: bolton; doublespeak; globalism; johnbolton; leftists; newworldorder; nwo; oneworlders; un; unambassador; unitednations; ussenate
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last
Many people who join organizations such as the World Federalists aka Citizens for Global Solutions have been sincerely motivated by a desire for world peace. The problem is history has shown time and again that true peace results from strength. That is how Ronald Reagan ended the Cold War.

While I think it is probable that the left will never comprehend "peace through strength," I think the deeper problem is that the left wishes for America's defeat.

1 posted on 04/11/2005 5:22:16 PM PDT by wagglebee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Let's get Bolton in there and show those socialists that America means business.

2 posted on 04/11/2005 5:27:31 PM PDT by wk4bush2004
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wk4bush2004

Exactly. The libs are going nuts over Bolton's appointment. I love the guy already.

3 posted on 04/11/2005 5:31:31 PM PDT by Ticonderoga34
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
Harpinder Athwal, has affirmed as recently as March 31 that her organization favors world government.

Meanwhile, the world is moving away from nationalist frenzy into tribalism.

4 posted on 04/11/2005 5:31:45 PM PDT by JimSEA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
We have a golden opportunity here to have an intelligent, thoroughly honest and well-qualified icon of the America spirit represent us at the United Nations.

We will have someone representing us at an organization that he believes is worthless. We know that, and so do all the people at the UN. So can he possibly hope to accomplish? He doesn't care if it's fixed or not, and they aren't about to work with him.

5 posted on 04/11/2005 5:35:29 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Good article. The global civil society is incoherent and will never amount to anything, but it won't go away.

6 posted on 04/11/2005 5:36:29 PM PDT by RightWhale (50 trillion sovereign cells working together in relative harmony)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #7 Removed by Moderator

To: Non-Sequitur

That's OK. At least he won't pretend that it's OK if it's NOT fixed.

8 posted on 04/11/2005 5:42:51 PM PDT by cinives (On some planets what I do is considered normal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

i loved jeanne kirkpatrick.

when she talked, liberals were offended.

9 posted on 04/11/2005 5:50:22 PM PDT by ken21 (if you didn't see it on tv, then it didn't happen. /s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

The UN has reached that point where repairing a broken toilet is no longer worth the time and effort.

10 posted on 04/11/2005 5:55:50 PM PDT by crazyhorse691 (We won. We don't need to be forgiving. Let the heads roll!!!!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
George Soros and World Federalists Join Forces Against John Bolton
The major media are trying to create the appearance of a groundswell of opposition to President Bush’s nomination of John Bolton as U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. The objective is to persuade several “moderate” Republicans on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to vote against Bolton, who is scheduled to testify at an April 7 hearing. But the campaign has a chance of succeeding only if the truth about the extreme nature of Bolton’s opposition is carefully concealed from the American people. 

In a typical story, Paul Richter of the Los Angeles Times reports that “disarmament groups” such as Citizens for Global Solutions and the Friends Committee on National Legislation are leading the opposition.

Citizens for Global Solutions is the new name of the World Federalist Association (WFA), a group openly dedicated to world government and global taxes. The group is running television ads against John Bolton in Rhode Island and Nebraska, in order to influence Republican Senators and Foreign Relations Committee members Lincoln Chaffee and Chuck Hagel into voting against Bolton’s confirmation. 

The WFA, or Citizens for Global Solutions, is the U.S. affiliate of the World Federalist Movement, [1] which says it is working on “how to implement” a “new global levy” or tax on the U.S. and other nations. [2]

At an April 4 anti-Bolton news conference at the National Press Club, Citizens for Global Solutions reaffirmed its support for world government. Charles J. Brown, President and CEO of Citizens for Global Solutions, repeatedly emphasized during his remarks the importance of America’s national interests in working with the U.N. When asked about the group’s support for world government, he said that his group “advocates for solutions that no one nation is off by itself” and that “we promote institutions that most effectively advance that goal.” He added, “And that is in the best interest of U.S. foreign policy.”

Pressed on whether this means that Citizens for Global Solutions is now disputing the notion that it is still backing world government, he said, “I’m not disputing that.” [3]

The news conference featured the dissemination of a 71-page “Briefing Book on John Bolton” and the airing of an anti-Bolton TV ad.

The FCNL [4] is a pacifist group whose slogan is “War is not the answer.” It is so extreme that it gave an award to Representative Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) in 2001 “for her courageous, solitary vote against authorization of a U.S. military invasion of Afghanistan.” [5] An article posted on the group’s web site and titled, “Finding Safety in the Age of Terrorism. Reflections on September 11, 2001,” declared that the correct response to 9/11 was to “stand our ground and reach out with love.”

The group also created an anti-Bolton web site. On a left-wing web site, one activist reacted to the WFA’s involvement by saying, “Is the World Federalist Association really the best venue for anti-Bolton stuff? I don't like Bolton or what he stands for, but world federalism is even lower on my list.” This statement reflects the nervousness of those on the left who fear that the pro-world government agenda of those opposing Bolton will be revealed to a wide audience.

Writing an anti-Bolton piece for the April issue of The American Prospect, Michael Tomasky even tried to conceal the truth about Citizens for Global Solutions, insisting it is merely a “nonpartisan membership organization dedicated to global interdependence.” 

The Washington Post published a March 22 column blasting Bolton under the headline, ““Wrong Man for the U.N.” The author was Peter Beinart, editor of the New Republic and a guest scholar at the Brookings Institution. In the edition of Newsweek dated April 11, Mark Hosenball reported that “Bush critics in the Senate” were “hunting for evidence to derail or delay” Bolton’s confirmation. [6]
On April 4, at that National Press Club event, [7] George Soros [8] entered the picture, dispatching his top aide, Morton Halperin,[9] director of U.S. Advocacy for the Open Society Institute, to appear at a press conference co-sponsored by Citizens for Global Solutions to oppose Bolton. He was appearing in his capacity as executive director of the Soros-funded Open Society Policy Center [10] in Washington, D.C. This is the 501 c (4) affiliate of the Open Society Institute.  Halperin, [11] a former Department of Defense and National Security Council Official, is a former associate of CIA defector and Castro collaborator Philip Agee. [12] The other co-sponsors were the Union of Concerned Scientists, Physicians for Social Responsibility, Peace Action, American Progress Action Fund, Friends Committee on National Legislation, and 20/20 Vision.

            In fact, the American Progress Action Fund [13] is another Soros- funded group. It is an affiliate of the Center for American Progress, and Halperin serves as senior vice president there.

So two of the eight organizations sponsoring the event were Soros front groups.
The American Progress Action Fund features an attack on Bolton on its web site, calling him the ”anti-diplomat.” [14] If you click on the feature, you go to the WFA web site. It also features a critical article about Bolton by Brooke Lierman, identified as “the special assistant” to Robert O. Boorstin,  the senior vice president for national security [15] at the Center for American Progress. Her bio describes her as the former “Wisconsin state field director for presidential candidate Howard Dean.” [16]

Appearing at the press conference as a member of the audience but playing a prominent role in the anti-Bolton effort is Steven C. Clemons, [17] the Executive Vice President of the New America Foundation [18]and director of the Japan Research Institute. [19] He has been publishing anti-Bolton commentaries on his blog. [20] He says about Bolton: “This is not a constructive reformer out to promote American interests in a dignified manner in the world's most significant multilateral institution.” [21]

The honorary chairman of the Leadership Council of the New America Foundation is John Whitehead, [22] a director of the Friends of the World Federation of United Nations Associations [23]and  a former chairman and now a vice-chair of the United Nations Association of the United States of America (UNA-USA).[24] UNA-USA reports funding from AARP, the Bank of China, and BNP Paribas, [25] the French bank that held more than $60 billion for the corruption-plagued U.N. oil-for-food program. [26]
Records show that Whitehead, the former managing partner for Goldman Sachs, has contributed to the New America Foundation through his Whitehead Foundation. [27] The John C. Whitehead School of Diplomacy and International Relations was established at Seton Hall University and created “in alliance with the United Nations Association of the United States of America and is associated with the UN through its Department of Public Information.” [28]

One of the other co-sponsors, Peace Action, resulted from the merger of Sane and The Nuclear Weapons Freeze Campaign. It responded to the 9/11 terrorist attacks on America “with a call for Justice not War.” It also opposed the war in Iraq. The group is so extreme that, in an analysis of congressional voting records in 2002, Senator John Kerry earned a favorable score of only 40 percent and then-Senator John Edwards got a meager 20 percent. By contrast, Rep. Dennis Kucinich, who favored establishment of a federal Department of Peace, earned 100 percent.  In the 2004 presidential campaign, its Peace Action political action committee called for the defeat of Bush but did not endorse Kerry because he was considered too moderate. It said that he had not made “a concrete pledge to overhaul the foreign policy of this country in the positive.”

Physicians for Social Responsibility is a member of the “Win Without War” coalition [29] opposed to the Iraq War. It describes itself as “the nation's largest antiwar coalition.”, another group funded by Soros, was a key member. The group’s public relations effort was handled by Fenton Communications, the same firm that worked for George Soros during his anti-Bush speaking tour before the 2004 presidential election. Fenton [30] was the public relations firm for and produced an ad for the group opposing the nomination of Alberto Gonzalez as Attorney General.  In the 1980s, Fenton represented the communist Sandinistas in Nicaragua and other anti-American radical forces. [31]  

The Union of Concerned Scientists was represented at the anti-Bolton news conference by Jonathan Dean, the group’s “Adviser on Global Security Issues.” [32] Dean was the reported drafter of the much-publicized letter to Senator Richard Lugar opposing Bolton’s nomination. [33] Dean, however, is also a past president of the pro-U.N. lobby group, the United Nations Association of the National Capital Area. [34] His bio declares that he “participated actively in the Hague Appeal for Peace conference in the Netherlands.” [35] Cora Weiss, the president of the Hague Appeal for Peace, [36] organized demonstrations against the war in Vietnam and met with Communist leaders in Hanoi. She operated the “Committee of Liaison” between Hanoi and American families of U.S. POWs.  [37]
The Hague Appeal favors:
·       “the creation of standing UN peace forces” and their funding through “alternative sources of finance” for the U.N. [38]


[3] In an interview, Harpinder Athwal of Citizens for Global Solutions was asked directly if the WFA favors world government. “Yes,” she said.  Athwal,Director of Strategic Planning and Communications at Citizen for Global Solutions, is not a U.S. citizen but a member of the far-left British Liberal Democrat Party.
[4] Tracy Moavero, FCNL’s Director for Grassroots Campaigns, “previously worked as the Policy Director for the Peace Action Education Fund and as a United Nations Security Council lobbyist in New York City.”
[6] The story said that, “Foreign Relations Committee staffers are looking into charges that Bolton attempted to intimidate or victimize two career intelligence officials for what he viewed as their insufficiently alarmist analyses of intel on purported Cuban biological weapons. Committee investigators have contacted both the State Department and the intel community seeking records and witnesses. But Bolton's opponents are unsure if they will be able to make their case in time for Bolton's confirmation hearing Thursday.”
[7] The event was booked and the room was held in the name of “Open Society” with Sudie Nolan as the contact. Nolan is the communications officer in the Washington Office of the Open Society Institute. She also serves as communications officer for the Open Society Policy Center.
[8] “Convicted in France of insider trading, Soros specializes in weakening or collapsing the currencies of entire nations for his own selfish interests. He is known as the man who broke the Bank of England. His power is such that his statements alone can cause currencies to go up or down. Other people suffer so he can get rich. But journalists don't want to examine the questionable means by which he achieved his wealth because they [shared] his goal of electing Kerry and the Democrats.  Curiously, once he made his fortune he became a global socialist, endorsing global taxes on the very means he employed to get rich – international currency speculation and manipulation.” See:
[9] Writing in The Nation magazine, Robert Dreyfuss revealed that Morton Halperin began discussions with Soros in 2002 about creating a new far-left think tank. Halperin, then head of the Soros Open Society Institute in Washington, D.C., brought former Clinton chief of staff John Podesta into the discussions. Podesta was made president of what became the Center for American Progress and Halperin became Senior Vice President.
[11] His son is Mark Halperin of ABC News, who wrote the infamous memo telling the media to go hard on George Bush during the final weeks of the 2004 presidential campaign.
[12] Agee now lives in Cuba and is the Director of, “the only independent U.S.-owned travel agency based in Havana.” See:
[15] “Over seven years with the Clinton Administration, he worked as the President's national security speechwriter; communications and foreign policy adviser to Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin; and adviser on the developing world to Secretary of State Warren Christopher.” See:
[17] Clemens said in an informal conversation before the event that he is being fed anti-Bolton information from inside the State Department and from “Fred Thompson Republicans” who were concerned about Bolton’s ties to Taiwan. 
[18] The foundation was supposed to feature “exceptionally promising new voices and new ideas to the fore of public discourse in the United States.” See: http://www.nira.gojp/ice/nwdtt/dat/1300.html
[30] Fenton says that Trevor Fitzgibbon, its director of media relations, “oversees and implements message development and regularly places guests and stories on ‘Meet the Press’ ‘Face the Nation,’ ‘This Week’ and other opinion-leading national network news programs.”
[35] Ibid.
[37] Dr. Robert Turner writes, “Because of my expertise on the Vietnamese communists, I was approached by some POW wives in 1972 and asked to talk with them about Hanoi's attitude towards POWs. That led to an invitation to address the November 1972 annual meeting of the National League of Families of POWs in Washington, DC. During this association, several wives of POWs told me about being contacted by a woman named Cora Weiss (reportedly the daughter of a prominent member of the American Communist Party) who often visited Hanoi and would bring back mail and other information about their husbands--IF family members would first agree to denounce the war in public. Most of the wives and family members showed incredible courage in this setting, refusing to cooperate even when they were told that if they denounced the war their husbands or sons would get better treatment in Hanoi. I was--and I remain--tremendously proud of them.” See:

11 posted on 04/11/2005 6:05:55 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe ("Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tailgunner Joe

It's a lot to digest, but I skimmed it and it looks like great information. Thanks.

12 posted on 04/11/2005 6:09:20 PM PDT by wagglebee ("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Taguba
Bolton will make a great addition to the Bush team. He is consistent with the moral character that Bush looks for...

And how do we know he has "moral character"? The RATS have not dug up any dirt on him that will stick.

13 posted on 04/11/2005 6:19:47 PM PDT by Loyal Buckeye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
He doesn't care if it's fixed or not, and they aren't about to work with him.

Some countries will work with us. We've seen it in Afghanistan and we've seen it in Iraq.

The more democracies that sprout up around the world, the more countries that will work with us.

Bolton is Bush's message to the U.N. and to the world, since there's really not much of a difference between the U.N. and the world. We're not going play by your rules and we're not going to isolate ourselves and go away.

14 posted on 04/11/2005 6:50:33 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wk4bush2004

Agreed. We should "mean business" ...

We could pull out of the UN and set up bilateral arrangements, side deals and "arm's length" trade regimes and ditch the WTO. At the law enforcement level, we can still deal with all of our affable counterparts in other countries and carefully share Intel, etc. (at the appropriate level ) as we go along. We all have some common ground in the WOT, so let's keep pushing areas in which we are receiving support. Kerry was a total dingaling in this regard, and Bush should have pressed this issue more. Heck, even the ISI coughs up some info.

Unipolarism's gotta' go as a theory. Bush was right; we can and shall take care of our own security. Our guys need not wear blue helmets in the process, either..

Either we have the US Army and US Marines or we have the World Army and World Marines? … Need to make sure that "U.S." is stamped on everything.

About Globalism, the choice is ours to make. I pray that we will choose wisely. As a side bonus, when we win, everyone in the world benefits and most countries know that. For example, we all KNOW that if North Korea (or any other regime like it) had the entire planet Earth under its grip, the entire place would be a stinking Hell Hole.

In this case right now (only in this case), it's too bad GW can't have a third shot at office. Despite some differences we all have here or there, generally speaking, my assessment is that Bush has had a steady hand upon the reins of power and he has proven himself beyond the shadow of a reasonable doubt that he is definitely a man of Character and deserving to be our President.

I am glad that I voted for him. Let’s hope that Bolton gets in. I really hope that we really do “mean business” and Pledge Allegiance as a society to our Constitution and not to cheat on it via the UN.

15 posted on 04/11/2005 6:57:26 PM PDT by Bald Eagle777 (...Charles LaBella Memo? Let the Dems run from this one...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Tailgunner Joe
Great post TJ.
16 posted on 04/11/2005 7:57:39 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (There are people in power who are truly evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

at the hearing: Code Pink and Barbara Boxer , birds of a feather flock together....

17 posted on 04/11/2005 9:11:16 PM PDT by injin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wk4bush2004
Can't have Bolton ............ afterall, he once called someone a munchkin!


18 posted on 04/12/2005 3:44:34 AM PDT by beyond the sea (Advanced Directive -- don't step on my blue suede shoes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Tailgunner Joe

'....the creation of standing UN Peace forces and the creation of alternative source of funding for the UN...'. This means US military (and technology) in blue hats, paid for by taxing each and every human on the planet whether we like it or not.

19 posted on 04/12/2005 3:54:50 AM PDT by hershey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign
Bolton is Bush's message to the U.N. and to the world, since there's really not much of a difference between the U.N. and the world. We're not going play by your rules and we're not going to isolate ourselves and go away.

Considering the contempt that Bush and Bolton hold for the organization, why should we believe that they will be willing to listen to us or accept US leadership?

20 posted on 04/12/2005 4:11:09 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson