Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11? Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11?

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Land Shark who wrote (10905)	6/14/2005 10:42:09 AM
From: sea_urchin	Read Replies (2) of 20039

OT yields > we don't profess to be the World's Policemen bent on spreading "Freedom" and "Liberty" everywhere. Our role has been traditionally to be peacekeepers Which is what I also thought -- until I read this. Now the US hopes to get the UN to front for its new role in bringing "democracy" everywhere -- and keeping it there. A neocon's dream. antiwar.com >>This week, Congress will vote on a bill to expand the power of the United Nations beyond the dreams of even the most ardent left-wing, one-world globalists. But this time, the UN power grabbers aren't European liberals; they are American neoconservatives who plan to use the UN to implement their own brand of world government. The "United Nations Reform Act of 2005" masquerades as a bill that will cut U.S. dues to the United Nations by 50 percent if that organization does not complete a list of 39 reforms. On the surface, any measure that threatens to cut funding to the United Nations seems very attractive, but do not be fooled: in this case, reform "success" will be worse than failure. The problem is in the supposed reforms themselves – specifically in the policy changes this bill mandates. The proposed legislation opens the door for the United Nations to routinely become involved in matters that have never been part of its charter. Specifically, the legislation redefines terrorism very broadly for the UN's official purposes – and charges it to take action on behalf of both governments and international organizations. What does this mean? The official adoption of this definition by the United Nations would have the effect of making resistance to any government or any international organization an international crime. It would make any attempt to overthrow a government an international casus belli for UN military action. Until this point, a sovereign government retained the legal right to defend against or defeat any rebellion within its own territory. Now any such activity would constitute justification for United Nations action inside that country.<<

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next