Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

It's the USA, Not the U.N.
newsmax.com ^ | 9/6/02 | John L. Perry

Posted on 09/07/2002 5:07:13 AM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!

It's the USA, Not the U.N.

John L. Perry

Much is made of Iraq's non-compliance with United Nations resolutions, missing the larger point: The security of the United States is threatened. That's what matters.

It is not the United Nations that is responsible – legally or any other way – for the security of the United States, or of any other nation.

National security is exactly what those words connote: The security of an individual nation.

Security Requires Sovereignty

That, in turn, is fundamentally what national sovereignty is about.

In the watery eyes of globalists, who yearn for elimination of all national sovereignty and its replacement by a universal super-government, the United Nations is but an interim instrumentality of worldwide authority, a transitory forerunner of Hillary Clinton's "global village" with ubiquitous claws and limitless wealth of taxation.

Anything that limits, erodes or demeans any individual nation's sovereignty is, to them, all to the good, a step nearer nirvana.

Boondoggle in Manhattan

The reality is that the United Nations' 185 member nations are nothing more, and frequently a lot less, than a spiffy international debating society, gaudy in costumes, Babelic in languages and ostentatious in limousines but as toothless as a confederacy of crotchety crones.

Indeed, that was how it was created at the end of World War II. It was Franklin D. Roosevelt's dream – and even he had reservations – that the wartime Big Three unity among the victorious United States, Great Britain and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics might be continued into the postwar recovery period.

That it might also serve as a major-powers bulwark against a recurrence of international aggression was dream, even wispier.

Anachronism of the Veto

In recognition of that, the Big Three gave each other a veto power, which soon became an absurdity and is today an operational aardvark.

The U.N. General Assembly, where each of the 185 member nations has a seat, is still merely a place to get in out of the rain while debating. Its resolutions are utterly powerless.

What little clout the United Nations possesses resides with the 15 member nations composing the Security Council, five of which are permanent members: Great Britain, France, the People's Republic of China, the Russian Federation and the United States.

How the Veto Works

To enact a resolution on a substantive matter takes nine affirmative votes of the 15 in the Security Council, of which five must be the votes of all five permanent members.

In other words, one negative vote among the Big Five means the resolution is dead.

Even if a substantive resolution is adopted, there is no practical means of enforcement unless the United States, as the world's only superpower, acts to enforce it. If the United States doesn't lend its muscle, nothing gets enforced. If only the United States acts to enforce, it will get enforced.

Of No Earthly Use

So who needs the United Nations? There are two answers to that question:

Answer 1: Every other nation on Earth except the United States thinks it needs the United Nations – but only so long as the United States acts to enforce a Security Council resolution and pay most of the freight.

Answer 2: The United States does not need the United Nations for anything, for it is the only nation with enough power to enforce any Security Council resolution.

Power, in this sense, includes not merely military force. It includes also economic resources. The United States is the only nation with enough wealth to finance enforcement.

Our Worthless Dependent

Even in the non-enforcement arena, the United States is critical to the day-to-day life of the United Nations. Were the United States to withhold its dues, the United Nations would collapse.

So all this talk about the United States' having to kowtow to the United Nations before it can take military action against Iraq is a lot of hooey.

Even the United Nations, global-gaga as it is, recognizes in its charter that every member state has the right to exercise its own sovereign power as it sees fit to protect its own vital national interests.

Right of Self-Defense

If the United States feels that Saddam Hussein's assembly of weapons of mass destruction is a threat to American security, it has the sovereign right to do whatever it thinks it must do to remove that threat.

And the same right has to be accorded to Iraq. If it feels it must engage in the production of mass-destruction weapons, that's its prerogative. There is nothing in the doctrine of national sovereignty that says a nation has no right to act with stupidity and self-destruction. Saddam Hussein might consult Adolf Hitler.

Is it bad that Iraq has flouted all those Security Council resolutions these many years? Of course it is – not because the Security Council has been ignored but because, in the process, Iraq has become a greater and greater threat to American security.

The Reason to Act

That's why the United States should go after Iraq, destroy those stockpiled weapons, remove Saddam Hussein and his outlaw regime and liberate that country for re-entry into the world community as a nation based on democratic principles.

If the United Nations General Assembly wants to spit in George W. Bush's face when he addresses its annual opening session shortly, so be it. If it wants to pay polite attention to what he has to say, that's nice.

If the United Nations General Assembly wants to register a veto vote on a resolution of support for war with Iraq, so be it. If it wants to adopt such a resolution, that's nice.

Getting Priorities Straight

The reality is the United Nations is as irrelevant to the world as mammary glands are to a boar hog.

The No. 1 business of the United States of America is to look out for the business of the United States of America. And No.1 on that agenda is the security of the American people.

There's nothing shameful about that, and President Bush need make no apologies to members of the United Nations. It is they who owe the United States of America, which has repeatedly come to their rescue – United Nations or no United Nations.

John L. Perry, a prize-winning newspaper editor and writer who served on White House staffs of two presidents, is a regular columnist for NewsMax.com.

Other Columns by John L. Perry



TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: its; not; the; un; unitednations; unitedstates; usa
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-81 next last

1 posted on 09/07/2002 5:07:14 AM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie; FreeTheHostages; 68-69TonkinGulfYatchClub; Coleus; Stand Watch Listen; backhoe; ...

2 posted on 09/07/2002 5:13:44 AM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
John L. Perry has his head on straight. The only thing he didn't say was "Get the US out of the UN"
3 posted on 09/07/2002 5:19:06 AM PDT by B4Ranch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
Actually the folks who seem not to get it do get it. They really want to abolish the concept of sovereignty.

Luckily, the UN is organized in such a way that it is unlikely to be accepted as a one-world government. The UN, with countries like Syria and Sudan having roughly equal standing with India, China, The US, and Great Britain, is absurd. And France being a permanent member of the security council (unless I am mistaken) does not improve the sense of it. Countries are not people, and they should not be treated as equal. It is this sort of basic flaw with the UN that helps to make sure that it never becomes a one world government.
4 posted on 09/07/2002 5:19:26 AM PDT by Montfort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Something Terribly Wrong in the U.N.
5 posted on 09/07/2002 5:20:30 AM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!; B4Ranch
Get the U S out of the U N
and the U N out of the U S

6 posted on 09/07/2002 5:26:54 AM PDT by brityank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Montfort
Your theory is sound but no matter how their brazen outlandish lies are so apparently exposed; can you explain this?

They are in charge, the U.S. surely seems second to them. A sovereign nation asks nobodies permission in offense or defense, nor should answer to anyone but the laws of their own country.

7 posted on 09/07/2002 5:29:20 AM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
When I was a kid growing up in New York, we used to go to the UN on school trips, every year. Back then we were all idealistic and starry eyed and thought the UN would mean something. It didn't take much growing up to realize that would never happen and the US was paying for the whole show and getting nothing in return.

It's long overdue for the US to get out of the UN and the UN out of the US. That's valuable property that could be better used and not a drag on NYC.

8 posted on 09/07/2002 5:34:05 AM PDT by Betteboop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Betteboop
Can't forget their little orange UNICEF boxes carried arouns at halloween. Does (did) Unicef's money truly go to world starvation?
9 posted on 09/07/2002 5:38:38 AM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: B4Ranch
ditto bump
10 posted on 09/07/2002 5:39:37 AM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
Sovereignty.

Is it bad that Iraq has flouted all those Security Council resolutions these many years? Of course it is – not because the Security Council has been ignored but because, in the process, Iraq has become a greater and greater threat to American security.Could it be that the United Nations welcomes this threat to the United States, has in fact allowed it to continue in hopes of finally breaking American Sovereignty?

In Perry's reference to a boar hog, my thoughts exactly and that is what our President should infer to this sanctimonious gathering of pampered thugs!

11 posted on 09/07/2002 5:43:07 AM PDT by yoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: brityank
The United States Program for General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World: U.S. Department of State
12 posted on 09/07/2002 5:43:34 AM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: yoe
The United Nations is quite brazen.

Conventional Arms Branch of the UN Department for Disarmament Affairs

13 posted on 09/07/2002 5:46:59 AM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
In reference to your link - Like any good horror movie, it's the basements of public buildings the inspectors want to check out. Saddam keeps his real horrors out of sight and under human shields.
14 posted on 09/07/2002 5:50:39 AM PDT by yoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: yoe; Carry_Okie
That and don't you think it is odd that the U.N. has recon/military planes. The article claims "the U.N." has these recon/spy pics. Who exactly did this recon work? NATO? The U.S.? Why was the U.N. listed for this feat?Is it political? Does the U.N. now represent everyone globally (outside of Iraq?) What is going on?
15 posted on 09/07/2002 6:00:10 AM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: EODGUY; Salvation; fatima; JMJ333; Cap'n Crunch; patent; billbears; Enough is ENOUGH; Alamo-Girl; ..

16 posted on 09/07/2002 6:10:43 AM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Jmouse007
Please post your excellent take on this.
17 posted on 09/07/2002 6:13:32 AM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
I found this to be insulting to Aardvaarks.
18 posted on 09/07/2002 6:19:48 AM PDT by xp38
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
Which article was referring to these spy pics? And did it say the UN had planes, or did they have pics (from some other source)?

I would think someone would take down one of these planes if it flew over their territory.

Someday, someone is going to declare war on the UN.

19 posted on 09/07/2002 7:00:07 AM PDT by gitmo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: xp38
We find an interesting parallel from recent events. Before any general speech to the American people our President is giving a speech to the UN general assembly seeking their approval for an attack on Iraq. Any consideration for national sovereignty would demand that more concern should be given to getting the American public informed and their approval before considering the UN.
20 posted on 09/07/2002 7:10:03 AM PDT by meenie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
Thanks for the heads up!
21 posted on 09/07/2002 8:04:25 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
Screw UN!
22 posted on 09/07/2002 8:45:55 AM PDT by MinorityRepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!


23 posted on 09/07/2002 8:53:51 AM PDT by Militiaman7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: B4Ranch
...I'll go you one further. As a citizen of theUSA, keep the IFG out of my life, property and liberty...

...There are those in power in this nation that want me to surrender my freedom as an individual...

24 posted on 09/07/2002 12:30:38 PM PDT by gargoyle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
That's right-- forgot about Trick or Treat for UNICEF!! We were such idealists back then. Now an idealist is really a fool out of touch with reality!!
25 posted on 09/07/2002 12:51:01 PM PDT by Betteboop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: gitmo
There are no real facts but the title of the article says it all.

U.N. Spy Photos Show New Building at Iraqi Nuclear Sites

26 posted on 09/07/2002 5:39:20 PM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Militiaman7

27 posted on 09/07/2002 5:40:02 PM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Betteboop
And if the money went to starving children we would have come quite near solving the problem by now with all the $$$$$$$$$ the U.N. gets. Why do we give them one red cent? For Koffi Annan's security, limos, 5 star hotels? Our founding fathers would be livid.
28 posted on 09/07/2002 5:44:28 PM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: FreedomFriend

29 posted on 09/07/2002 7:12:51 PM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
Washington was a smart man.
30 posted on 09/07/2002 7:37:50 PM PDT by FreedomFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
this thread, this whole issue is our most
important....Erskin Bowles,Bill Clinton and
Robert Rubin set up the 3td way to dilute
American in law,military,and God. The
mouthpieces like Scrowcroft were in on the idea
too.
31 posted on 09/07/2002 11:01:45 PM PDT by cactusSharp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
The NWO is very much in charge, including this country. All one has to do is go to the UN website and start reading. It will ALL sound frighteningly familiar, because it is so entrenched in the USA today.
32 posted on 09/07/2002 11:38:08 PM PDT by brat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cactusSharp
It is indeed the most important issue we should all be watching carefully.
33 posted on 09/08/2002 6:13:17 AM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: brat
Remember when folks that used the term NWO were written off as tin-foil VRWConspirator Nut cases? Then they coined the new term 'globalization' and they think somehow it is more 'acceptable' ;non-conspiratable' because of the new PC term.
34 posted on 09/08/2002 7:33:34 AM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Betteboop; All
Krauthammer Warns "One Worlders” Curb U.S. Efforts to Protect Itself
Wes Vernon, NewsMax.com
Friday, Sept. 6, 2002
WASHINGTON – The winner of this year’s "Mightiest Pen” award has condemned "one worlders.” In fact, says Charles Krauthammer, President Bush’s "distinctive” unilateralist go-it-alone-if-necessary foreign policy in general - and with respect to Iraq in particular - is justifiable. Krauthammer, however, believes the chief executive’s two immediate predecessors have made it difficult for the commander in chief to exercise America’s "self-evident right to resist evil.”

Accepting the coveted award Thursday from the Center for Security Policy (CSP), Krauthammer warned against "easy one worldism” that eight years of the Clinton administration’s foreign policy permeated into U.S. foreign policy. But the journalist also said President Bush’s father set "a costly and dangerous precedent” in seeking United Nations approval in the effort to get Iraq out of Kuwait in 1991 BEFORE first going to the U.S. Senate.

With a top official of the present Bush administration also featured on the program, Krauthammer delivered a scathing denunciation of "liberal internationalists” who, he said, have tried to impede this nation’s ability to do what is right. The respected writer whose column appears in more than 100 newspapers across the nation, recalled that four out of five Democrats voted against giving the senior President Bush the go-ahead, and noted some of the few Democrats who did vote yes were persuaded to do so by the approval or permission of "the international community.”

"That puzzles me,” he said. "By what logic are the Chinese, Russians and the French [who sit on the U.N. Security Council] the arbiters of international morality? It was beyond me then, and it is beyond me now.”

That precedent - amplified in spades by President Clinton - has put the current President Bush in the position where he believes he needs world approval to go after Saddam Hussein, albeit with the sensible caveat that this country will act in its own interests with or without that approval, the CNP audience was reminded.

Should that in fact be a procedure in President Bush’s current crisis in Iraq?

"In principle, no. As a practical matter, yes,” Krauthammer said. "That practical policy has dominated our international thinking over the past ten years,” he complained, adding it is widely considered normal that the United States cannot act in its own interests without the green light "from this or that U.N. Security Council resolution.”

That mentality went into eclipse briefly after 9-11, but once again the rhetoric on Capitol Hill and elsewhere has revived it.

Krauthammer cited Bill Clinton - president of "the most powerful nation on earth” at one time pausing in the middle of a foreign policy speech, "stressing international approval over the best interests of the United States.”

"By what logic do we turn to Moscow or Paris rather than the American peoples’ elected members of Congress?” he wanted to know.

This is not an argument against consultation. We have "a moral obligation” to consult if in doing so, "it might assist our own purposes.” But we should do it with the understanding that protecting the safety and best interests of Americans is our number one responsibility, something which in Krauthammer’s opinion the U.S. Senate failed to do several years ago, when it ratified "that ridiculous Chemical Weapons Treaty, even though it was unenforceable.”

He cited an instance several years ago when the Swedes scolded Finland and demanded to know the reason for the latter’s refusal to go along with the Land Mines Treaty. A top Finnish official at the time replied dryly, "Because Finland is their [its critics’] land mine.”

By the same token, the United States "is much of the world’s land mine,” the award-winning columnist claimed, noting - to cite one example - that it won’t be Swedes or French on the front line if another war breaks out in Korea.

A letter from Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was read to the gathering. The secretary praised Krauthammer’s wisdom in the foreign policy field.

Defense Under Secretary Dov S. Zakheim, who was present for the luncheon, praised the writer for his strong sense of "what is right and what is not.”

Zakheim allowed as how whether to subscribe to the mostly left-wing Washington Post, Krauthammer’s home paper, was "an issue” in his household, but that the columnist’s writing "justifies the subscription.”

He also drew praise from Rep. Christopher Cox, R.-Calif., best known for his chairmanship of a special congressional committee which in 1998 investigated the Chinagate scandal and its implications for U.S. security.

Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:

United Nations

35 posted on 09/08/2002 7:37:13 AM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
I think he underestimates the scope of influence of the United Nations. I just received my new neighborhood Agenda 21 packet. Under subtitles of Neighborhood Watch, Peace and Serenity, Neighborhood Beauty and Maintenance, Tree and Shrub maintenance, Traffic control, and Know Your Code Enforcer, is a list of things I may and may not do to my property, what I may and may not do on it. Who my neighborhood "captian" is, and how to influence my neighbors to get in line with the program. I promptly filed it in the trash can.

Any agency that makes the bold statement as the U.N. did regarding them having taken over the control and peservation of our resources is not an entirely weak agency. At the very least our government uses the U.N. to enforce on Americans what they wouldn't dare try on their own because of the Constitution, but because it's an international "compromise" it's suppose to be ok. We do want to get along with the rest of the world, now don't we?

Yeah, the author better take another look at the U.N.

36 posted on 09/08/2002 7:56:51 AM PDT by MissAmericanPie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MissAmericanPie
OMG the only words not in your neighborhood nazi piece was bio-diversity kill all babies but don't touch those turtle eggs.

Rest assured this leftist crap is the MINORITY. Look at the election map from last election. I am sorry you are subject to this nazi crap where you live.Ever thought of moving to the country somewhere?

37 posted on 09/08/2002 8:04:39 AM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
Yup, I remember the little orange boxes. I'm quite sure the money this trick-or-treater collected went directly into the Swiss bank account of Idi Amin. Ugh, I think I need to take a bath now.
38 posted on 09/08/2002 8:14:27 AM PDT by AngryJawa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
Actually I have thought of moving to the country, the thing is country is getting farther and father out, and ever more expensive. Also I find these things hard to flee from, I'm just too stubborn and mean I guess, this stuff won't fly in the face of the Constitution, someone needs to point that out.
39 posted on 09/08/2002 8:17:55 AM PDT by MissAmericanPie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: AngryJawa
And or for the elite personal expenses of the SecGen of the U.N.
40 posted on 09/08/2002 8:23:01 AM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: MissAmericanPie
I hear more each day about this nazi neighborhood crap.Including the Marine (on I think Dateline) that was ordered to take his huge American flag and pole down; and GOOD NEWS he one.

You are right 'the country' is turning into uppity crammed homes with a gate....soon it will be nazi and or they will order the old farm homes in the country to move for U.N. land.

41 posted on 09/08/2002 8:26:57 AM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: MissAmericanPie; All
Jun 16, 2002

Governor Rallies Around Vet's Outlawed Flagpole

JUPITER - Gov. Jeb Bush celebrated Flag Day with a Marine Corps veteran who owes nearly $30,000 in fines for flying an American flag from a 12-foot pole in his front yard.

George Andres, who was stationed in the Pacific from 1956-1962, violated his homeowners association policy and a court order when he raised his flag from a pole instead of from brackets attached to his house.

Friday, Bush gave Andres a flag that flew over the state Capitol.

``Rather than just say it's unacceptable, people ought to put aside their differences and their obsession with rules and regulations, and use common sense to make decisions,'' Bush said.

Bush signed legislation in April allowing homeowners to fly Old Glory in a reasonable, respectful manner and to file suit against homeowners associations that forbid it.

In June 2001, a judge ordered Andres to pay $100 for each day the pole remains outside his town house since she ordered him to take it down in October 2000. Bush presented Andres a personal check for $100 Friday.

Steven Selz, an attorney for the association, said the group has tried to reason with Andres and told the judge not to jail him.

This story can be found at : http://www.tampatrib.com/floridametronews/MGAW6PXGI2D.html

CLICK HERE: FOR ARTICLE SOURCE.


42 posted on 09/08/2002 8:31:41 AM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: MissAmericanPie; amom; Alamo-Girl; EODGUY; JMJ333; brat; Enough is ENOUGH; Born in a Rage; ...
THE AMERICAN HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION

These people need researched and exposed. They are most likely tied to the left via the U.N.

43 posted on 09/08/2002 8:37:20 AM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: MissAmericanPie
Very little research directly linked the U.N. to this.

OMG!!!!! Unbelievable!

44 posted on 09/08/2002 8:51:39 AM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: MissAmericanPie; Jim Robinson; brat; Mercuria; AnnaZ; lowbridge; Alamo-Girl; amom; backhoe; ...
Re: post 32. Post 44 proves that an American Marine Veteran owes the U.N. $30,000 for flying a large American flag pole.
45 posted on 09/08/2002 8:58:28 AM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: MissAmericanPie; Jim Robinson; brat; Mercuria; AnnaZ; lowbridge; Alamo-Girl; amom; backhoe; All
Typo SORRY!

I meant post 42

46 posted on 09/08/2002 9:01:42 AM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
Buuuump!
47 posted on 09/08/2002 9:04:10 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: MissAmericanPie
Did this literally have the U.N. name symbol on it?
48 posted on 09/08/2002 9:04:45 AM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl; Jim Robinson
Re: 42.

Bush signed legislation in April allowing homeowners to fly Old Glory in a reasonable, respectful manner and to file suit against homeowners associations that forbid it.

The question is....what is "reasonable, respectful"???

If a marine wants to erect a flagpole as big as he wants what does anyone care to judge his business?

My worry...is what is the definition of "reasonable, respectful?"

No one being nor law should dictate what one does on and in their own property unless they are endangering others.

RIGHT?

49 posted on 09/08/2002 9:11:08 AM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
Conclusion

In conclusion, the local government community remains committed to the implementation of Agenda 21. Having renewed the United Nations' commitment to the Local Agenda 21 process at the UN Conference on Human Settlements, local government organizations are preparing for the expansion of the Local Agenda 21 movement. The continued growth of this movement will require that new resources for Local Agenda 21 planning are deployed in keeping with the principles of Local Agenda 21 itself; that is, in partnership with the national, regional and international associations of local government that initiated Local Agenda 21 and that have made it such a success for the United Nations and for a growing number of cities and towns throughout the world.

Finally, Agenda 21 will never be achieved through planning alone. The ability of the Local Agenda 21 movement to achieve real, positive impacts on social and environmental conditions will require the establishment of supportive national government frameworks in each country for local sustainable development.

It looks like that is already starting to unfold. They'll most likely give money to the US government to disseminate down to the local governments who choose to institute these anti-property rights initiatives. Thus, it us up to the US government not to take the bait. However, it seems like they're already getting wrapped up in this.

50 posted on 09/08/2002 9:13:34 AM PDT by FreedomFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-81 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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