Blog: More outrages at the UN’s Human Wrongs Council

United Nations Human Rights Council logo.

United Nations Human Rights Council logo. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Blog: More outrages at the UN’s Human Wrongs Council.

Rick Moran

Ah, the Orwellian, through the mirror world of the United Nations where up is down, black is white and wrong is right. And the US and Israel are always wrong.

Celebrating Human Rights Day last week the UN’s so called Human Rights (sic) Council, whose membership consists of such gross human rights violators as Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia and Mauritania, elected the representative of Mauritania as vice president.

Hillel Neuer, of UN Watch, publicly objected, explaining

“It is obscene for the U.N. to use the occasion of Human Rights Day, when we commemorate the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to elect the world’s worst enabler of slavery to this prestigious post,” said Hillel Neuer, UN Watch executive director.

“The U.N. is making an arsonist head of the fire department. It defies both morality and common sense.”

According to a recent report by the Guardian, “up to 800,000 people in a nation of 3.5 million remain chattels,” with power and wealth overwhelmingly concentrated among lighter-skinned Moors, “leaving slave-descended darker-skinned Moors and black Africans on the edges of society.”

Meanwhile over at the UN’s Education, Science, Culture Organization (UNESCO) Syria–the country involved in a murderous civil war against its own civilian citizens, men, women, children, different religions, ethnicities, tribes–remains a member of their human rights (sic) committee which “rules on individual human rights complaints worldwide.”

Despite having murdered tens of thousands of its own people, the Bashar al-Assad regime remains a full member of UNESCO’s human rights committee, “and no one at UNESCO seems to care the slighest bit,” said UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer.


“UNESCO is allowing the Assad regime to strut in Paris as a U.N. human rights arbiter — it’s indefensible and an insult to Syria’s victims.”


However, while a resolution was adopted censuring Syria’s violations — a welcome first for UNESCO — the promised call to oust the regime from UNESCO’s human rights panel was excised.

U.S. ambassador David Killion had urged UNESCO to revisit the decision. The watered-down text included language suggesting UNESCO chief Irina Bokova could raise the issue again, but she has failed to do so.

Not so surprisingly, when there is an occasion to condemn the US or Israel, the UN quickly springs into action.

That’s their idea of human rights.

While we pay the bills – Tea Party Nation

While we pay the bills – Tea Party Nation.

Posted by Judson Phillips

The United States pays 25% of the bills of the United Nations.  You remember the United Nations?  It was Franklin Roosevelt’s parting gift to America, set up by Soviet Spy Alger Hiss.


Yes, a Soviet spy clearly wanted to set up a pro-American, pro-liberty world movement, right?


Every year the UN beclowns itself a little more. 


Now it has pretty much hit rock bottom.
From the Free Beacon:


The Washington Free Beacon has obtained a report soon to be released by the United Nations that calls for an international campaign of legal attacks and economic warfare on a group of American companies that do business in Israel, including Hewlett-Packard, Caterpillar Inc., and Motorola Solutions Inc.

The Human Rights Council (HRC), a body dominated by Islamic countries and known for its hostility to, and heavy focus on, the Jewish State, issued the report. The George W. Bush administration refused to participate in the HRC, but President Barack Obama joined it soon after taking office. Members of the HRC include infamous human rights abusers such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Jordan, Libya, China, and Cuba.

The Obama-approved body maintains a “Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories [sic].” The current rapporteur is American college professor Richard Falk, a 9/11 “truther” who once posted an anti-Semitic cartoon on his personal blog.

In a letter to U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon, the Anti-Defamation League’s Abraham Foxman blasted the report and the HRC’s special rapporteur: “We believe you should have prevented the Secretariat from being a party to Mr. Falk’s anti-Israel agenda. Mr. Falk’s entire tenure as Special Rapporteur has served to undermine the credibility of the institution of the United Nations.”

The report attempts to instigate a campaign of boycott, divestment, sanctions, and legal action against a litany of international companies doing business in Israel. In addition to American companies, the U.N. targets include major European firms such as Veolia Environnement, Group 4 Security, the Dexia Group, the Volvo Group.

“The costs to companies and businesses of failing to respect international humanitarian law are considerable,” the report warns, “including damage to a company’s public image, impact on shareholder decisions and share price and could result in employees being criminally responsible for rights abuses.”

The report warns American employees of targeted companies that they face legal risks.

“Employees of companies can face investigation and prosecution for human rights violations committed irrespective of where the violation was committed.”


Isn’t that lovely.  These nations have no problem with lunatics who commit mass murder, but the only Democracy in the Middle East is subject to attempts to wipe it off the face of the earth.


Adolf Hitler must be jumping for joy to see this unbridled wave of anti-Semitism launched against Israel.


As for America, Israel has been a very good ally, despite the fact the anti-American occupant of the White House has tried to throw Israel under the bus.


It is time to throw both Obama and the UN under the bus. 


If we stay in the UN after President Romney takes over, we should no longer give it a dime.  If the UN doesn’t like that, they can get the hell out.  In fact, that really is the best idea. 


Tell the UN to get the hell out of America.

Foreign entanglements – Tea Party Nation

Foreign entanglements – Tea Party Nation.

Posted by Judson Phillips

George Washington wisely suggested to the new nation that it avoid foreign entanglements.  We have one foreign entanglement that is not only a disaster for America, but it may impact our Presidential election.

 What is it and why should every American be outraged?

 The entanglement is the United Nations.

 The United Nations was Franklin Roosevelt’s brainchild.  Roosevelt was the closest thing to a dictator this nation has ever had.  He almost had his dream of a socialist, centrally planned economy during World War 2 thanks to the powers a war time President has.  He directed his aide and Soviet spy Alger Hiss to draw up the plans for the UN.

 Isn’t that wonderful.  A communist spy gave us the United Nations.

 Now the UN is doing more than simply being a massive waste of American tax dollars. 

 It is actually interfering in an American election.

 The United Nations is sending observers to watch conservative groups in the upcoming Presidential electoin.  The Obama Regime claims these conservative groups are trying to suppress voter turn out.  The only voters these activists are trying to suppress are the dead voters that Democrats amazingly turn up every four years.

 The UN is not interested in dead voters or the Democrats who vote early and vote often but they are interested in groups that are trying to ensure a fair and accurate election.

 If that was not bad enough, the UN has all but endorsed Barack Obama.

 Ben Emmerson is the United Nation’s Special Rapporteur on Counter Terrorism and Human Rights.  He has said electing Mitt Romney would be a “democratic mandate for torture.”  It seems this brain donor objects to the fact that we used enhanced interrogation techniques on terrorists like Sheik Khalid Mohammad and Mitt Romney is refusing to promise we won’t use it again if he is elected.

 Thanks to the use of those enhanced interrogation techniques, we stopped a number of terrorist attacks on America.  I guess Emmerson would have been happier if we gave these terrorists four star suites at the Hilton and let thousands of Americans die.

 This idiot has in the past demanded that the United States turn over videotapes and other classified information or face a UN Inquiry over drone strikes against terrorists.

 Emmerson wants America to stop drone attacks that are killing terrorists.   Unfortunately he shows no such concern for the lives of Americans who are targets of terrorism.

 In addition to interfering with our elections, the UN wants to trample our constitution.   The UN Small Arms treaty is working its way through the final process of being approved.  Many people believe Barack Obama will sign this treaty that could devastate our 2nd Amendment rights after the election.

 This terrible treaty takes the far left position that self-defense is a collective right of society, not an individual right.  As such, all nations are encouraged to restrict and even ban the private ownership and transfer of guns.

 Our founding fathers were far smarter than any of those clowns at the United Nation.  The UN calls Israel a rogue nation yet puts the genocidal leader of the Sudan on the Human Rights Council

 The real question is why the United States is even a part of this organization any more?

 The United Nation champions nations that are not free and condemns those that are.  It is the enemy of freedom and liberty.  It demands a phenomenal amount of money from America.  Basically we are paying the bill so they can say we are evil.  We are paying the bill so they can interfere in our elections and in our government. 

 Regrettably Mitt Romney has said nothing about this.  It would be great if he were to expel the United Nations from America and get America out of the United Nations.

 If he will not, it is long past time that We the People stand up and demand that America leave the United Nations.


The UN Gun Control Treaty Is Bad for Gun Owners Everywhere – Chuck Norris –


The UN Gun Control Treaty Is Bad for Gun Owners Everywhere – Chuck Norris –

Last time I checked, Americans were responsible for making our own laws. We do not invite foreign nations to have a say in how we govern ourselves within our own borders. Yet if you follow what’s been going on with the United Nations this year, you know that the USA came perilously close to having other countries dictate our gun laws. And the fight isn’t over yet.

The United Nations has been debating an arms trade treaty for nearly a decade now. Though the treaty is ostensibly focused on military arms, it has long been clear that the majority of U.N. delegates consider our personal firearms to be crying out for international regulation, as well. The focus of the treaty would be a demand that governments regulate the sale and possession of firearms worldwide — all of them, including yours and mine.

Though I believe that firearms should not be in the wrong hands, the proposed terms of this global gun control treaty would overreach wildly into regulating the sale of firearms to law-abiding citizens. In other words, the proposed treaty is a mechanism for Iran and other tyrannical powers to have a say in your gun ownership.

The George W. Bush administration wisely opposed this concept, asserting that any agreement to regulate private gun ownership would represent a threat to our Second Amendment freedoms. This proclamation was the death knell for the first U.N. gun control treaty conference more than 10 years ago.

But bad ideas at the U.N. never go away; they just fade until the political climate changes. Treaty discussions went underground for several years — until the Obama administration announced a willingness to consider a new treaty, as long as the parties operated under “consensus.”

The debate reached a fever pitch during a monthlong marathon negotiation session in July. The goal was to disgorge a treaty in time for the Obama administration to sign it before Election Day. The draft treaty was odious on its face. Among other things, it would have required the United States to “maintain records of all imports and shipments of arms,” register the identity of the “end user” of those firearms and then report the user’s information to a U.N.-based gun registry. In several drafts, the treaty would have mandated that every round of ammunition be tracked globally.

What’s really ironic here is that the United States already has the most comprehensive system in the world for regulating international arms transfers. Other nations could achieve the stated goals of the treaty process by simply emulating our protocols. But the reality is that the treaty was actually intended as a mechanism to submit our unique Second Amendment guarantees to international inspection — and condemnation.

As I have mentioned, the treaty negotiations broke down this summer, and that is a good thing. But that doesn’t mean the U.N. is giving up the fight. It’s just reducing it into smaller pieces. In fact, in late August, an umbrella organization of 23 separate U.N. agencies, known as the Coordinating Action on Small Arms, adopted the first portion of International Small Arms Control Standards. The ISACS text is made up of 33 separate modules, some 800 pages in total. And they’re just getting started.

What can we do? We can ensure that we have a president who will not support the treaty and a Senate that will not ratify it. That’s not a one-time commitment. Remember that once a treaty is enacted, it can be picked up at any time by a president and Senate. There are smaller gun control treaties that have been floating around the Senate for ratification since 1998.

What can you do? You can make sure that you and every freedom-loving American you know is registered to vote. I’m proud to serve as the honorary chairman of Trigger The Vote, the National Rifle Association‘s nonpartisan campaign to register voters who support the Second Amendment. We’ve made it easy on our website; all the tools to register are there, at If you’re already registered, you probably know someone who isn’t. Share the stakes with that person, and urge him or her to join the rolls of informed voters.

Throughout my life, I’ve been committed to preserving our freedom from threats, both foreign and domestic. This proposed U.N. global gun control treaty may not be an “invasion” in the classic sense of the word, but believe me; over time, it represents the potential for encroachment of the greatest kind. Protect your rights by registering to vote today.


EDITORIAL: Dangers of U.N. disabilities treaty – Washington Times


EDITORIAL: Dangers of U.N. disabilities treaty – Washington Times.

Proposed pact is a challenge to U.S. sovereignty

Americans are second to none when it comes to showing compassion for those in need. Yet the United States could soon find itself taking orders from international bureaucrats on how to treat people with disabilities. We don’t need the help.

On Wednesday, the United Nations kicks off its fifth conference on the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), a treaty already ratified by 153 countries. The event is being held in New York to pressure U.S. lawmakers to make it the law of the land here, too. The Democratic-controlled Senate Foreign Relations Committee endorsed the agreement in July with a 13-6 vote, and the full Senate could take up ratification at any time.

The CRPD is an invitation to join U.N. internationalists on the slippery slope away from sovereignty. Article 4 of the pact calls on signatories to “undertake to ensure and promote the full realization of all human rights and fundamental freedoms for all persons with disabilities without discrimination of any kind on the basis of disability.” Shifty lawyers can interpret such loose legal language in unexpected ways. For example, U.N. bureaucrats could call on the federal government to supply every wheelchair-bound citizen with a motorized model, or proclaim that each home must be wheelchair-accessible.

Democrats and Republicans take opposing positions on the the treaty. President Obama is urging the Senate for ratification. The Republican platform unveiled at the national convention several weeks ago rejected the pact along with other U.N. treaties “whose long-range impact on the American family is ominous or unclear.” Should the disabilities treaty remain unratified and Democrats get their clock cleaned in November, Republican President Mitt Romney would urge a GOP-majority Senate to ensure it stays that way.

The agreement’s Article 7 directs, “States Parties shall ensure that children with disabilities have the right to express their views freely on all matters affecting them … .” Families beware: “Ratification of the CRPD would fundamentally alter the parent-child relationship in any family where the child has a disability,” writes home-school advocate Michael Farris. Senators shouldn’t have to be warned that Americans don’t take kindly to government busybodies insinuating themselves between parents and their children. Mothers and fathers of disabled kids — not Uncle Sam — are best prepared to meet the needs and “views” of their children.

Pro-life advocates see a potential abortion mandate in the pact. Article 25 orders signatories “to provide persons with disabilities with the same range, quality and standard of free or affordable health care and programs as provided other persons, including in the area of sexual and reproductive health and population-based public-health programs.” Senate Democrats insist the treaty wouldn’t override U.S. law on abortion, but pro-lifers worry the sweeping language could do exactly that. Sen. Marco Rubio, Florida Republican, attempted to add an amendment that would exclude abortion from the phrase “sexual and reproductive health,” but it was defeated in committee.

Americans don’t need advice from the U.N. on how to protect the rights of the disabled.

The Washington Times


UN Gun Control Treaty Will Kill Second Amendment » Commentary — GOPUSA

UN Gun Control Treaty Will Kill Second Amendment » Commentary — GOPUSA.

By Floyd and Mary Beth Brown

“Representatives from many of the world’s socialist, tyrannical and dictatorial regimes [are gathering] at the United Nations headquarters in New York for a month-long meeting, in which they’ll put the finishing touches on an international Arms Trade Treaty that could seriously restrict your freedom to own, purchase and carry a firearm,” warns Chris Cox, the executive director of the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA).

It’s happening right now. The member states of the United Nations have been meeting, behind closed doors with Hillary Clinton, since July 2nd to hammer out the final details on their so-called Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) and Barack Obama, has vowed to sign it on July 27th.

If you’re not worried, you should be. Cox goes on to say: “You might think that something so obviously menacing to one of our enumerated fundamental rights would receive a strong rebuke from our top government leaders. But you’d be wrong. This is President Barack Obama’s vision for America, and we’re expected to just go along with it.”

Make no mistake, your constitutional and God-given right to keep and bear arms may forever be regulated and controlled by thugs within the United Nations.

As a matter of policy, President George W. Bush not only opposed the ATT, but also proclaimed that the United States would have no involvement with the planning or implementation of the ATT. He wanted no part of this treasonous treaty.

As Bloomberg news reported, under the Bush Administration, the United States “was the only nation to oppose the 2006 resolution to create an international treaty on the sale of small arms and light weapons, and subsequent measures to continue the talks.”

But the times, they are a changing. Instead of following President Bush’s example and saying, from the get-go, that this voluntary surrender of our constitutional rights will ever see the light of day; Senate Republicans are taking more of a ‘let’s-wait-and-see-what-the-UN-comes-up-with’ approach.

And while Republicans procrastinate, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are legitimizing and actively negotiating something that is illegitimate, a treaty the United States should never be negotiating in the first place.

Make no mistake, our elected officials like to talk tough. As a matter of fact, a number of Senators penned a strongly worded letter on ATT to Barack Obama last year, and they even went so far as to say that they would “oppose ratification of an Arms Trade Treaty presented to the Senate that in any way restricts the rights of law-abiding citizens to manufacture, assemble, possess, transfer or purchase firearms, ammunition and related items.”

Don’t be lulled into complacency by the tough-sounding rhetoric. Words are cheap and anyone who knows how the UN operates knows that its S.O.P. is deception. The ATT will, without a doubt, contain written promises and grandiose assurances and the UN will assure far too many Senate Republicans that the ATT will in no way restrict your right to legally own a firearm.

Once the ATT is signed and ratified our own government, under the supervision of the thugs of the United Nations, will start to “regulate” and, soon thereafter, start to “confiscate.” Don’t take our word for it. Former UN ambassador John Bolton, says that the UN “is trying to act as though this is really just a treaty about international arms trade between nation states, but there is no doubt that the real agenda here is domestic firearms control.”

EPA’s Plans for Implementing UN’s Agenda 21 –

EPA’s Plans for Implementing UN’s Agenda 21 –

Written by 

One of the most successful grassroots campaigns during the past year has been the Stop Agenda 21 movement both at the local level and state level. However, we haven’t heard as much about Agenda 21 implementation at the national level.

Of course, there were President Bill Clinton‘s establishment of the President’s Council on Sustainable Development by executive order in 1993 and President Obama’sFederal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance” executive order in 2009. And, many federal agencies have been incorporating sustainability into various aspects of their organizations. Still, virtually all Stop Agenda 21 grassroots activity has been focused on the local and state levels.

The establishment of Clinton’s President’s Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD) started a pattern of denial by federal government agencies regarding any connection with the United Nations Agenda 21. Even though the PCSD was clearly established in 1993 in support of the UN’s Agenda 21 and its Sustainable Development proposals from the UN’s ’92 Earth Summit in Rio, the PCSD’s statements and documents never referred to the UN and Agenda 21.

We have evidence that federal officials were taking pains to make the PCSD appear to be completely separate from the UN’s Agenda 21 because J. Gary Lawrence, an advisor to the PCSD, said the following in 1998:

Participating in a UN advocated planning process would very likely bring out many of the conspiracy-fixated groups and individuals in our society…. This segment of our society who fear ‘one-world government’ and a UN invasion of the United States through which our individual freedom would be stripped away would actively work to defeat any elected official who joined ‘the conspiracy’ by undertaking LA21 [Local Agenda 21]. So, we call our processes something else, such as comprehensive planning, growth management or smart growth.

This helps explain why virtually all federal activities in pursuit of sustainability rarely make any reference to the UN or the UN’s Agenda 21, even though these federal activities are very much in sync with the UN’s Agenda 21.

Nonetheless, there have been very significant developments regarding sustainability at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) beginning with its 40th anniversary in late 2010. On November 30, 2010, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson stated: “Today I am formally requesting President Cicerone and the National Academies convene a committee of experts to provide to the U.S. EPA an operational framework for sustainability that applies across all of the agency’s programs, policies, and actions.”

Jackson added: “Today we have a new opportunity in front of us. We have an opportunity to focus on how environmentally protective and sustainable we can be. You see, it’s the difference between treating disease and pursuing wellness.”

The National Academies of Science (NAS) responded with a detailed study, Sustainability and the U.S. EPA (aka the “Green Book”), which cost the EPA $700,000, and which was published in August 2011. The NAS also produced a five-minute video (see video also below) about this project.

Here are some excerpts from the 286-page “Green Book”:

• “The [UN’s World Commission on Environment and Development] called upon the UN General Assembly to transform its [1987] report into a global action plan for sustainable development. The nations of the world did precisely that at the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development, or ‘Earth Summit,’ in Rio de Janeiro. These nations, including the United States, endorsed a global sustainable development action plan, known as Agenda 21, and a set of 27 principles for sustainable-development, called the Rio Declaration. Together, these agreements modify the definition of development by adding a third pillar — environmental protection and restoration — to the economic and social pillars of development.”

• “First, the committee recommends that EPA formally adopt as its sustainability paradigm the ‘Three Pillars’ approach of ‘Social,’ ‘Environment,’ and ‘Economic’ dimensions of sustainability.”

• “Sustainability impact assessment is used to analyze the probable effects of a particular project or proposal on the social, environmental, and economic pillars of sustainability.”

Thus, the “Green Book” acknowledges that the nations of the world, including the United States, “endorsed a global sustainable development action plan, known as Agenda 21” at the ’92 Earth Summit in Rio. Next, the NAS committee recommended that “EPA formally adopt as its sustainability paradigm the ‘Three Pillars’ approach of ‘Social,’ ‘Environment,’ and ‘Economic’ dimensions of sustainability.” Which would make the EPA sustainability paradigm exactly in sync with the three pillars of sustainable development agreed upon at the ’92 Earth Summit. Finally, the NAS proposed a new tool for EPA, the sustainability impact assessment, that would be “used to analyze the probable effects of a particular project or proposal on the social, environmental, and economic pillars of sustainability.”

Therefore, it is apparent that the NAS “Green Book” is positioning the EPA to become the premier federal agency for implementing Agenda 21 in the United States.

EPA spokesman are wary in this highly-charged, election-year political climate about making any definitive statement regarding whether and how soon the EPA would adopt the “Green Book” sustainability methodology. However, it is clear from listening to the audio of the November 30, 2010, meeting where the EPA commissioned the NAS to produce a new “operational framework for sustainability” for the EPA that the EPA sees the “sustainability paradigm” as the future for the agency.

Moreover, just to keep it real for those of us accustomed to the American way of life, here is what Maurice Strong, Secretary-General of the UN Earth Summit in Rio in 1992, said in his opening speech to the attendees: “Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class — involving high meat intake, the use of fossil fuels, electrical appliances, home and work-place air-conditioning, and suburban housing — are not sustainable.” (Emphasis added.)

Based on Strong’s remarks, it doesn’t take much of an imagination to predict just how much downward pressure on our standard of living would be exerted by a sustainability oriented EPA.

It also doesn’t take too much talent at connecting the dots to understand that an EPA based on sustainability, an EPA that wants to pursue wellness, not treat disease, an EPA that wants to use “sustainability impact assessments” to analyze the probable effects of a particular project or proposal on the social, environmental, and economic dimensions of sustainability — that would be an EPA that would aspire to regulate in detail virtually every aspect of our lives, thus completely destroying our freedom and prosperity.

The point of all of the above is that even though the EPA is already guilty of vastly over-regulating us, an EPA based on an operational framework of sustainability would be much worse.

There’s currently no legislation in Congress to stop the EPA from implementing the UN Agenda 21 concept of sustainability. Realistically, given the makeup of Congress, there’s virtually no chance that a bill could be passed this year to stop EPA implementation of Agenda 21.

However, in light of the rapid growth of the Stop Agenda 21 movement over the past year, and the changes that will occur with the elections in November, Congress could very well be more likely to initiate and pass anti-Agenda 21 legislation in 2013. Click here if you would like to send a message to your Representative and Senators about this issue.

Prison » Arizona Bill Would Ban UN Agenda 21 Within State


Prison » Arizona Bill Would Ban UN Agenda 21 Within State.

Alex Newman
New American
May 1, 2012

As nationwide opposition against the controversial United Nations Agenda 21 “sustainability” plan continues to build, a popular bill in Arizona that analysts say looks set to pass would prohibit all state agencies and political subdivisions from implementing or supporting any portion of the UN’s so-called “sustainable development” scheme. The legislation was approved by the state Senate last month and has already cleared initial hurdles in Arizona’s House of Representatives.

As nationwide opposition against the controversial United Nations Agenda 21 “sustainability” plan continues to build, a popular bill in Arizona that analysts say looks set to pass would prohibit all state agencies and political subdivisions from implementing or supporting any portion of the UN’s so-called “sustainable development” scheme. The legislation was approved by the state Senate last month and has already cleared initial hurdles in Arizona’s House of Representatives.

The two-page bill, known as SB1507, would prevent the state, county, and city governments of Arizona from adopting any tenets of theUN Declaration and the Statement of Principles for Sustainable Development. It would block any other international schemes that violate the U.S. or state constitutions as well.

Under the proposed law, all public entities in Arizona would also be barred from cooperating with, funding, or implementing any programs linked to a controversial global organization known as ICLEI (formerly named International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives). The UN-backed non-profit organization, based in Germany, seeks to force the “sustainability” plan on the world by stealth.

“Any way you want to describe it, Agenda 21 is a direct attack on the middle class and the working poor,” sponsor Sen. Judy Burgessaid during a hearing on the bill last month; noting that even though the U.S. Senate had refused to ratify the global plan, former President Bill Clinton used an executive order to start foisting it on America by stealth anyway. “The primary goal of Agenda 21 is to create social engineering of our citizens and it will impact every aspect of our daily lives.”

A Tea Party activist who testified at the hearing called Agenda 21 an insidious attack on American sovereignty in an effort to build a one-world order. He also said the Obama administration was using taxpayer-funded grants to prod state and local governments into implementing the “subversive” scheme.

In an e-mail to MSNBC, state Sen. Burges, a Republican, further explained why the legislation is desperately needed. “The bill is designed to protect the rights of Arizona citizens and prevent encroachment on those rights by international institutions,” she explained. “We have three branches of government and when one branch preempts the process through executive orders, the balance of power is lost in the process. It is that simple – no more, no less.”

Among state Representatives, alarm about the UN agenda is building, too. State Rep. Terri Proud, for example, told supporters that the scheme “will take away our rights as Americans by allowing the United Nations to mandate laws on our soil. … It’s very real and it is happening.”

Another Republican, state Rep. Eddie Farnsworth, said the UN did not have America’s best interests at heart. “I have concerns about us giving up our sovereignty to the United Nations and the World Court,” he explained.

The state lawmakers have also found strong support across America for their fight against the global “sustainability” scheme. Lawmakers in Tennessee, for example, just approved a bill slamming the UN agenda as an insidious socialist plot to dismantle national sovereignty and private property rights. Other states are considering similar resolutions even as a growing number of local governments continue to drop their controversial memberships in ICLEI.

At the national level, the Republican National Committee passed a resolution earlier this year blasting Agenda 21, too. And RNC members have publicly expressed support for the Arizona bill.  “SB 1507 will prohibit the imposition of UN Agenda 21 here in Arizona which is an insidious plan by the United Nations to force their governance on our state, counties, municipalities, schools and even neighborhoods,” noted National RNC Committeeman for Arizona Bruce Ash, congratulating lawmakers for their efforts.

“UN Agenda 21 preaches population control as well as control of where we live and how we live. The UN Agenda strips America of our wealth and threatens our sovereignty,” he added. “If SB 1507 passes and is signed by Governor Brewer we will … protect our liberty and way of life. This is a must pass piece of legislation.”

Because the UN agenda’s tentacles have spread so far over the last two decades, analysts are not entirely sure how broad the legislation’s effect might be. The bill could, for instance, potentially stop “green” corporate welfare by ending controversial wealth transfers from taxpayers to businesses that claim to adopt “sustainability” measures.

Some pro-Agenda 21 scaremongers, however, have attempted to drum up unfounded fears about the bill with hysterical and false claims about its potential effect on welfare programs. “We wouldn’t be able to use CFL light bulbs in state buildings because that would be considered energy efficiency,” alleged state House Minority Leader Chad Campbell, a Democrat. In reality, the bill would do nothing of the sort, and he almost certainly knows that.

Campbell also falsely claimed that Arizona’s welfare department could be dismantled under the bill. Ironically, he even said the state university system’s “sustainability” programs could disappear – saving taxpayers vast sums of money. However, fantasy-based straw-man attacks notwithstanding, it was not immediately clear why Campbell opposed the legislation.

“This is the most ludicrous bill I’ve ever seen in six years in the legislature,” Campbell claimed. “It’s the most poorly crafted bill in this state.” He also made headlines with a ludicrous conspiracy theory of his own, claiming that “the Tea Party and conspiracy theorists run the state now.”

Rabid supporters of Agenda 21 continue to claim that critics of the UN schemes somehow believe in a “conspiracy theory.” Of course, the global “sustainability” plan is neither a conspiracy nor a theory. In reality, the documents are all online for the world to see.

But pro-UN extremists, lobbyists, and people who depend on government-mandated “sustainability” programs for their livelihood are still attempting in vain to manufacture an outcry against the bill. Some members of the establishment press, meanwhile, have been dutifully repeating the hysterical claims even though the UN’s own documents are available online.

The chief architects of the plan have made its nature very clear as well. “Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class — involving high meat intake, the use of fossil fuels, electrical appliances, home and work-place air-conditioning and suburban housing — are not sustainable,” claimed UN Earth Summit Secretary-General Maurice Strong as he ushered in Agenda 21 two decades ago.

Despite efforts to paint opposition to Agenda 21 as a conservative movement, however, the broad coalition seeking to stop it largely transcends party lines – at least at the grassroots level. In Tennessee, for example, more than a few democrats joined the GOP majority to overwhelmingly pass a resolution condemning the UN schemes. And the organization “Democrats Against U.N. Agenda 21” has been a key player in exposing the global plot.

But even as efforts to defeat the agenda gain unprecedented momentum in the U.S., the UN is moving full-speed ahead toward doubling down on the controversial plan. Recently released official documents revealed that the global body plans to use its upcoming Conference on Sustainable Development in Rio de Janeiro — known as Rio+20 to mark the 20-year anniversary of the Earth Summit — to amass a broad array of new powers and literally re-make civilization.

The Arizona legislation must clear one more hurdle in the state House of Representatives, a roll-call vote expected as early as next week, before heading to Gov. Jan Brewer’s desk for her signature. The Governor did not comment on the bill when contacted by reporters, as is typical.


Earth Day and the Great “Sustainability” Lie – Tea Party Nation

Earth Day and the Great “Sustainability” Lie – Tea Party Nation.

By Alan Caruba

Americans are paying the hangman for the rope.

It is estimated that since the origin of the global warming hoax in the late 1980s, Americans have seen $50 billion of their dollars thrown down the climate change rat hole.

In a January CNSnews commentary, Elizabeth Harrington noted that “A study by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) determined that the United States (has been) funding the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the United Nations’ authority on alleged man-made global warming, with $31.1 million since 2001, nearly half of the panel’s annual budget.”

“In a Nov. 17, 2011 report, ‘International Climate Change Assessments: Federal Agencies Should Improve Reporting and Oversight of U.S. Funding’, the GAO found that the State Department provided $19 million for administrative and other expenses, while the United States Global Change Research Program provided $12.1 million in technical support through the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSP), averaging an annual $3.1 million to the IPCC over 10 years–$31.1 million so far.”

The forthcoming UN Rio+20 IPCC international conference in June will switch course from the discredited global warming hoax in favor if its fundamental agenda, the imposition of a global government that reflects the UN’s goal of a worldwide socialist economy. The sovereignty of individual nations will be subject to the dictates of a small group of UN bureaucrats.

The theme will be “sustainability.”

There is a reason that the upcoming Earth Day, April 22nd, falls on the birthday of Vladimir Lenin, the former Soviet Union’s first dictator. Everything associated with the environmental movement has communism as its basis.

In February, KPMG, a Swiss entity and “a global network of professional firms providing audit, tax and advisory services” operating in 152 countries, held a conference that attracted “more than 600 top CEOs and senior business leaders from many of the world’s major corporations.” It was held in cooperation with the United Nations Global Compact, the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, and the United Nationals Environmental Programme. Among those attending were former President Bill Clinton and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

It issued a report, “Business Perspective on Sustainable Growth: Preparing for Rio+20 and offered recommendations “to scale-up investment in sustainable development, provide strong price signals on resource scarcity and environmental impacts” and “deliver new platforms for public-private collaboration at the international and national levels.”

In other words, the UN is laying the groundwork to ensure that its bogus sustainability agenda will offer enough inducements to the global business community to ensnare them in its control.

In an article by Terence Corcoran in the Financial Post, he characterized Rio+20 saying, “It’s as if the high priests of Occupy the Planet and the Green Apocalypse—having run their old socialist and environmental engines into the ground—have stumbled across a new set of rationalizations and slogans.”

As if the Obama administration hasn’t wasted billions on its green energy agenda, funding one failed renewable energy company after another, the White House Council on Environmental Quality announced in March that it will sponsor its third annual “GreenGov” Symposium September 24-26 in Washington, D.C.

“The Symposium will bring together leaders from government, the private sector, non-profits and academia to identify opportunities to create jobs, grow clean energy industries, and curb pollution by incorporating sustainable practices into the Federal Government’s operations.” If this wasn’t so ludicrous, I’d laugh, but these are the lies the Obama administration wants you to believe.

And people wonder why President Obama killed the Keystone XL pipeline, imposed an illegal moratorium on oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, and his administration has issued fewer leases for the exploration and extraction of oil on federal lands than any other.

Throw in the Environmental Protection Agency’s war on the coal industry, and the Interior Department’s limits on access to federal land known to contain uranium deposits for the nuclear energy industry, and you begin to see how our own government is conspiring to leave the United States of America bereft of the energy reserves that we have in abundance!

The nation’s energy needs and its dollar are being weakened in order to eliminate it as the only real deterrent to the United Nation’s, Russia’s and China’s global ambitions.

The Earth has not warmed in fourteen years and it is not running out of energy reserves of oil, coal, and natural gas.

As the global warming hoax is shelved, the sustainability hoax is being rolled out and will be on full display June 20-22 in Rio de Janeiro conference when the usual suspects and charlatans gather to plot the continuation of their socialist revolution.

There is not one single reason why the U.S. taxpayer should be contributing to this communist cabal and conference.

© Alan Caruba, 2012

Green Pillage and Plunder – Tea Party Nation

Green Pillage and Plunder – Tea Party Nation.

By Alan Caruba

To understand what is behind all the talk, the legislation, the protests in support of “global warming”, now commonly called “climate change”, you have to understand the millions, if not billions, at stake for the liars who dreamed up this greatest hoax of the modern era.

The basics:

There is no dramatic warming of the Earth. There never was though it has passed through periods of warming. The most recent mini-ice age lasted from around 1300 and ended around 1850; the Earth began to warm again to normal levels. Warming and cooling cycles, like Ice Ages, are well documented and warm is better because it produces greater crop yields, increased forest growth, whereas cooling endangers life.

The Earth entered a normal cooling cycle around 1998 and is still in that cycle. The Earth is at the end of an interglacial period between Ice Ages and it will enter a new one. The Earth is not heating up. It will get very cold and stay that way for thousands of years.

During the last Ice Age more than a third of the Earth was covered in ice and the air had less, not more, carbon dioxide (CO2). Carbon dioxide correlates with periods of warmth and the most recent such period saw the rise of human civilization and expansion of the human population during the current interglacial period.

Carbon dioxide plays no role whatever in “heating up” the Earth. In terms of the Earth’s atmosphere, it is a miniscule 0.038%. The rest is mostly water vapor. The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is equivalent to one penny out of $100.00.

Volcanic eruptions produce more CO2 than human-related activity and there are at least twenty such eruptions from active volcanoes occurring as you read this.

If you shut down all the power plants, all the factories, all the bakeries, all commerce, the only result would be the destruction of the economy. Similarly, if you thwarted all coal, natural gas, and oil production, the agenda of the current administration, the only effect would be to render millions without jobs and without the capacity to turn on the lights or heat their homes.

Carbon dioxide is vital to all life on Earth because no vegetation can exist without it.

The UN and Green Organizations:

The global warming hoax is the creation of the United Nations and, in particular, its Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the agency responsible for the Kyoto Protocols of December 11, 1997 intended to reduce CO2 production worldwide. What purpose is served by this? One answer is the weakening of the economies of industrialized nations. It is a little known fact that both China and India were exempt from the Protocols.

It has taken some nations a while to wake up to the suicidal effects of the IPCC program. In early November, Canada slashed the budget of its environmental program; in particular the ozone monitoring costs that were the result of the Montreal Protocol. If the U.S. was to follow suit, the savings would be billions. The EPA and NOAA budgets for 2010 were $10.3 billion and $5.5 billion dollars, respectively.

As recently as November 1st, the IPCC was claiming that weather events from the October snowstorm that hit northeastern U.S. and the record floods in Thailand were the result of—you guess it—global warming. It’s latest report asserts that it is “virtually certain” that the world would have more extreme spells of heat and fewer of cold. Thus, by this warped logic, warming causes blizzards.

The perpetrators of the “climate models” produced by the IPCC over the years were exposed in 2009 in what has since been called “Climategate.” Emails between them revealed the deliberate deception. It is estimated that the U.S. has spent over $50 billion on “climate research” since the late 1990s.

Support for the global warming hoax came from science journals and the mainstream media. The IPCC received a Nobel Prize. Al Gore’s documentary on global warming received an Oscars. It was all a lie, but the sale of bogus “carbon credits” reaped millions for those engaged until the exchanges offering them were forced to close their doors.

Much of the regulation being forced upon the American economy by the Environmental Protection Agency is predicated on the “control” of carbon dioxide and is directed at plants that generate fifty percent of all the electricity used daily and coal mines that provide that energy.

On November 8th, the Obama administration announced its intention to regulate CO2 emissions from power plants. On November 10th, it announced a delay in the authorization of a new oil pipeline from Canada. Environmental organizations such as the Sierra Club and Friends of the Earth were jubilant despite the estimated 20,000 jobs that were lost from the delay. There are some 50,000 pipelines in the U.S. that provide the energy we use daily.

We are witnessing the strangulation of the American economy by the United Nations, the Obama administration, U.S. and international environmental organizations, and much of the mainstream media that continues to report on “greenhouse gas emissions.”

We are long since passed the time for U.S. withdrawal from the UN and the shutdown of the EPA. Every day that passes is a nail in the nation’s coffin.

© Alan Caruba, 2011