Posted on 02/03/2005 10:37:05 PM PST by hedgetrimmer
I like SUN. And yeah. I dunno if the common would be good or bad though.
Freedom from the UN.
Then again, you don't wanna know my punciation and English grade either....lol
Have you ever hear of "Move America Forward"? They are a group working to get the US out of the UN and the UN out of the US. Their numbers are growing.
LOL my english and punctation are under the weather too.
I heard of them. Yes. They are one of the best groups.
Have you signed their petition to get the US out of the UN and the UN out of the US?
Yep I did. I signed that the first time I ever saw it.
Good, my fellow American.
Please Lord, I didn't see that I would be typing on that unholy number.
You did that purely unintentional. If anythgn epitomizes that number its the UN itself.
It is a number that belongs to the UN, they are Godless.
http://www.21stcenturytryst.org/nation.doc
What has happened to the nation state in this new system? First it has become less aggressive. Indeed the new system is possible only because the imperial urge seems to have died in European states. It is striking that the developed world as a whole is neglecting the many fine opportunities for imperialism which are open to it, eg in Africa or in the Balkans. It may be that European states have come to understand that the costs of war or colonies far exceed any possible benefits. Wealth and power today depend not on the acreage of land owned but on skills, capital and technology.
Second, states have become more open. Especially in Europe the distinction between external and internal affairs is increasingly hard to sustain. International treaties permit challenge inspection not only of armies but also of prisons (Council of Europe Convention on Torture), abattoirs, and beaches. European negotiating processes determine the price of agricultural products, the amount of fish that can be caught and the way animals are looked after in zoos.
Thirdly in a world of growing individualism there is growing sympathy for other individuals. International news media can make events in distant lands dramatic and immediate. Against this background the morality of Machiavelli is no longer sustainable. Governments have to follow the concerns of voters. Most people do not want to belong to states which behave according to raison d’état, disregarding moral issues. Governments are obliged to take account of issues such as human rights and environmental damage.
Fourthly the network of international agreements to which almost all states subscribe has radically limited their freedom of action. Admittedly it would be possible to tear up all treaties and to refuse to operate international agreements; but no state could gain by this. The cumulative effect of international agreements and of the written and unwritten rules of the international system is to limit the freedom of action of the individual state very considerably. The image of Gulliver bound by the thousand silken threads of the Lilliputians (which was often applied to Germany) could be applied to Leviathan.
What, in this situation, is the meaning of sovereignty? If sovereignty is defined as a state’s monopoly on law and force within its own territory, then it exists today only in an attenuated form. The monopoly on law has been weakened by every international treaty obligation. In particular for European countries the monopoly has been broken by the creation of an alternative source of law in the collective law making capacities of the European institutions. The monopoly on force is circumscribed in a number of ways: by alliance obligations, by arms control treaties, by international institutions such as the UN, and in some special cases by the (contested) right of humanitarian intervention.
As we approach the end of the 21st century a new definition of sovereignty is needed. If sovereignty no longer means the monopoly on law and force what then does it mean? Probably it is best defined today as the right to cooperate, the right to reach international agreements, the right to a seat at the table.
Its more than just the UN we're fighting
How about Sovereingnty International?
I agree. That was what I meant by epitomy.
Our enemies all have some connections to the UN though. The UN is a dictator's country club and meeting place.
bump
Why did the United Nations University have something called the UN Legitimacy Project?? - and why did they check in to look at my old 'geocities' website years back?
Thanks to you both for the articles on a new definition of sovereignty.
GeronL, the article you posted is nightmarish:
its outright lies and spin are deplorable. Its still hard for me to accept that people in their right minds would go along with the godless New World Order.
Good question. Before I started home schooled I got various liberal and UN-propaganda shoved in my face in publik school. Of course I knew it was not true, I come from an anti-UN and anti-liberal military family.
They are the touchstone. The internationalist in this country, "OUR" politicans will lose their main base, the UN. We have to start somewhere. And, they are a good place to start.
Notice that my note to you in not at the 666 number. However, I want to call to your attention in the event that you don't already know it that the U.N. Meditation Room is replete with occult symbolisms, and is maintained by either the Theosophical Society or the Lucius (formerly Lucifer) Trust. (I can't remember which, but both are involved with U.N. matters.)
There's also a little book "The Cult of the All-Seeing Eye" that is still in print that provides much detail about the Meditation Room.
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.