Posted on 05/30/2012 9:09:57 AM PDT by cap10mike
The same United Nations that appointed Cuba, China and Saudi Arabia to its Human Rights Council is now looking to steal something that belongs to us. The same United Nations that includes China and Pakistan as members of its Security Council now wants to make the United States less financially secure. The same United Nations that wants to confiscate your firearms also wants your offshore gas and oil revenues. And it is doing so with the advice and consent of our own government, which is now dusting off a long-forgotten treaty that was rejected 30 years ago to give it another go-around.
(Excerpt) Read more at bizpacreview.com ...
I thought I understood LOST was up for a vote right about now. After Richard Lugar (main GOP proponent) has been primaried.
Anyone have status?
Down down the rabbit hole of absurdity goes USAlice in wonderland, meeting the UN Queen now.
THE U.N. SHOULD PACK UP AND GET THE HELL OUT OF NYC. TAKE ALL THEIR STAFF, ETC., AND FIND A NEW HOME. AS A FOLLOW UP, THE USA SHOULD GET THE HELL OUT OF THE UN.
!!!!!
No wonder Emperor Hussein The Traitor is chomping at the bit to sign it!
John Kerry (chairman of the committee) said there won’t be a vote on the treaty before the election. I think we know what that means, that he, the democrats, and their republican handmaidens (Lugar, McConnell, Graham, Brown, etc) will strong-arm this and other treaties through while they still have control and the votes.
And turn the UN building into something useful - like a rehab center for wounded warriors.
That was my original understanding also. I’ve since learned that it will probably be postponed until after the election.
If the entire treaty is enacted, the UN will control ALL waterways that empty into the sea, which almost all ultimately do.
Good idea!! Perhaps they could also could construct apartments for many of the homeless vets in NYC.
I just skimmed it, and this doesn’t do near what LOST does. I’ll look it over closer tonight.
I found my source on the vote hold-over. It was a Wall Street Journal article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304840904577422553538346904.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Sorry - I should have included it in the post.
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.