[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
(s)Elections See other (s)Elections Articles Title: Obama Backs U.N. Bill to Disarm Americans This is just in from Sen. Coburn’s office. Obama has authored a bill, and it is now in the Senate, to give the UN .7% of our GNP to be used to feed hungry 3rd worlders, AND to use UN force to disarm you and me and all gun owners. No one in the media has brought this to the attention of the general sheeple out here. Sent: Monday, May 05, 2008 12:48 PM Subject: RE: Obama’s bill S2433 passed the committee and going to the Senate Senator Coburn is blocking this bill. Patrick Guinn Obama’s bill S2433 would require the U.S. to initially direct .7 percent of our GNP into the United Nations coffers for distribution as they see fit, for "food" to third world nations. Under earlier agreements this would evolve into a national tax on the U.S. with the UN attempting to levy this on all first world nations. The U.N. would have the power to increase this rate of taxation. The U.S. would be required to surrender some of its sovereignty over foreign aid by putting it under UN control. The bill would force the U.S. to sign onto the U.N.’s Millennium Declaration, which would commit us not only to "banning small arms and light weapons" but also to adhere to the International Criminal Court Treaty and the Kyoto Protocol. http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_2433.html Detailed Summary Global Poverty Act of 2007 - Directs the President, through the Secretary of State, to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the U.S. foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the United Nations Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day. Requires the strategy to contain specific and measurable goals and to consist of specified components, including: (1) continued investment or involvement in existing U.S. initiatives related to international poverty reduction and trade preference programs for developing countries; (2) improving the effectiveness of development assistance and making available additional overall United States assistance levels as appropriate; (3) enhancing and expanding debt relief as appropriate; (4) mobilizing and leveraging the participation of businesses and public-private partnerships; (5) coordinating the goal of poverty reduction with other internationally recognized Millennium Development Goals; and (6) integrating principles of sustainable development and entrepreneurship into policies and programs. Sets forth specified reporting requirements. Directs the Secretary of State to designate a coordinator who will have primary responsibility for overseeing and drafting the reports, as well as responsibility for helping to implement recommendations contained in the reports. Defines specified terms. Status of the Legislation Latest Major Action: 4/24/2008: Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 718. http://kilosparksitup.blogspot.com/2008/02/more-on-barack-obama-s2433-global.html More on Barack Obama’s S.2433 : Global Poverty Act We know for a fact that this bill will cost America $845 billion above and beyond what America already spends on global aid in the next thirteen years. America will be locked in to giving .7 percent of the U.S. gross national product. That in itself is scary enough, but there is way more to Obama’s bill. It also locks us into United Nations Millennium Summit. Cliff Kincaid from Accuracy in Media is all over this bill. He writes-(Underlined by me) The bill institutes the United Nations Millennium Summit goals as the benchmarks for U.S. spending. "It is time the United States makes it a priority of our foreign policy to meet this goal and help those who are struggling day to day," a statement issued by supporters, including Obama, said. Specifically, it would "declare" that the official U.S. policy is to eliminate global poverty, that the president is "required" to "develop and implement" a strategy to reach that goal and requires that the U.S. efforts be "specific and measurable." Kincaid said that after cutting through all of the honorable-sounding goals in the plan, the bottom line is that the legislation would mandate the 0.7 percent of the U.S. GNP as "official development assistance." "In addition to seeking to eradicate poverty, that (U.N.) declaration commits nations to banning ’small arms and light weapons’ and ratifying a series of treaties, including the International Criminal Court Treaty, the Kyoto Protocol (global warming treaty), the Convention of Biological Diversity, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women and the Convention of the Rights of the Child," he said. Those U.N. protocols would make U.S. law on issues ranging from the 2nd Amendment to energy usage and parental rights all subservient to United Nations whims. Kincaid also reported Jeffrey Sachs, who runs the "Millennium Project," confirms a U.N. plan to force the U.S. to pay 0.7 percent of GNP would add about $65 billion a year to what the U.S. already donates overseas. And the only way to raise that funding, Sachs confirms, "is through a global tax, preferably on carbon-emitting fossil fuels," Kincaid writes. On the forum run by Americans for Legal Immigration PAC, one writer reported estimates of taxes from 35 cents to $1 dollar a gallon on gasoline would be needed.(LINK) This ladies and gentleman is the Barack Obama vision for America . WND called Obama’s office and the others who support this bill….No comments. See Obama’s Global Tax Bill (S.2433) Change Obama can believe in: Socialism?
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 39.
#9. To: christine (#0)
(Edited)
S. 2433 (whose 15 cosponsors include 4 Republicans, Lugar, Smith, Snowe, and Hagel) would do no such thing. All that it would require the executive branch to do is to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide , between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day, and to file a report on the strategy with Congress. Everything else in the bill (which makes no mention of Kyoto, the ICC, or firearms, as far as I can see) is hortatory, without legal effect. If it were so controversial, do you think Lugar would have signed on as a cosponsor?
Might have something to do with Lugar being a puppet of big agriculture.
He's also a senator from a state with voters who would not appreciate being disarmed.
To take concerted action to end illicit traffic in small arms and light weapons, especially by making arms transfers more transparent and supporting regional disarmament measures, taking account of all the recommendations of the forthcoming United Nations Conference on Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons. Now what does that mean? Could mean anything, they don't specify.
Obama's bill mentions the Millennium Development Goals, but nowhere does it give them the force of law. It directs the executive branch to take account of certain named goals among those Millennium Development Goals in developing and implementing the strategy it mandates, but nothing about disarmament measures or making arms transfers more transparent is among the goals that it names.
Ignoring your fantasy of legal interpretation (as if that matters in Congress anymore) it's what Obama wants that indicates his unacceptability as a candidate any freedom-loving citizen should support. That goes for the others, too. Maybe this concept is too harsh for you.
This article is about how scary Obama's bill allegedly is. I point out that it's not scary. So you tell me it doesn't matter what Obama's bill says.
That's what you said, not I.
There are no replies to Comment # 39. End Trace Mode for Comment # 39.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||