SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Pastimes : GET THE U.S. OUT of The U.N NOW! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Eashoa' M'sheekha who wrote (3)12/24/2001 11:48:22 PM
From: alan w  Read Replies (4) | Respond to of 411
 
Tim I agree completely with you. If the UN had any credibility it went out the window with the last selection of leaders. Keep up the good work.

alan w



To: Eashoa' M'sheekha who wrote (3)1/7/2002 10:32:55 AM
From: Tadsamillionaire  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 411
 
Report of the Commission on Global Governance:
Our Global Neighborhood
(From eco-logic, January/February, 1996)

The Commission on Global Governance has released its recommendations in preparation for a World Conference on Global Governance, scheduled for 1998, at which official world governance treaties are expected to be adopted for implementation by the year 2000. Among those recommendations are specific proposals to expand the authority of the United Nations to provide:

Global taxation;
A standing UN army;
An Economic Security Council;
UN authority over the global commons;
An end to the veto power of permanent members of the Security Council;
A new parliamentary body of "civil society" representatives (NGOs);
A new "Petitions Council";
A new Court of Criminal Justice; (Accomplished in July, 1998 in Rome)
Binding verdicts of the International Court of Justice;
Expanded authority for the Secretary General.
These proposals reflect the work of dozens of different agencies and commissions over several years, but are now being advanced by the Commission on Global Governance in its report entitled Our Global Neighborhood (Oxford University Press, 1995, ISBN 0-19-827998-3, 410pp).

The Commission consists of 28 individuals, carefully selected because of their prominence, influence, and their ability to effect the implementation of the recommendations. The Commission is not an official body of the United Nations. It was, however, endorsed by the UN Secretary General and funded through two trust funds of the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), nine national governments, and several foundations, including the MacArthur Foundation, the Ford Foundation, and the Carnegie Corporation.

The Commission believes that world events, since the creation of the United Nations in 1945, combined with advances in technology, the information revolution, and the now-global awareness of impending environmental catastrophe, create a climate in which the people of the world will recognize the need for, and the benefits of, global governance. Global governance, according to the report, "does not imply world government or world federalism." Although the difference between "world government" and "global governance" has been compared to the difference between "rape" and "date-rape," the system of governance described in the report is a new system. There is no historic model for the system here proposed, nor is there any method by which the governed may decide whether or not they wish to be governed by such a system. Global governance is a procedure toward defined objectives that employs a variety of methods, none of which give the governed an opportunity to vote "yes" or "no" for the outcome. Decisions taken by administrative bodies, or by bodies of appointed delegates, or by "accredited" civil society organizations, are already implementing many of the recommendations just published by the Commission.

The Foundation for Global Governance

The foundation for global governance is the belief that the world is now ready to accept a "global civic ethic" based on "a set of core values that can unite people of all cultural, political, religious, or philosophical backgrounds." This belief is reinforced by another belief: "that governance should be underpinned by democracy at all levels and ultimately by the rule of enforceable law."

The report says: "We believe that all humanity could uphold the core values of respect for life, liberty, justice and equity, mutual respect, caring, and integrity." In the fine print, these lofty values lose much of their appeal. Respect for life, for example, is not limited to human life. "Respect for life" actually means equal respect for all life. The Global Biodiversity Assessment (Section 9), prepared under the auspices of the United Nations Environment Programme, describes in great detail the biocentric view that "humans are one strand in nature's web," consistent with the biocentric view that all life has equal intrinsic value. Some segments of humanity may balk at extending to trees, bugs, and grizzly bears the same respect for life that is extended to human beings.

More article at...
sovereignty.freedom.org



To: Eashoa' M'sheekha who wrote (3)2/3/2002 3:48:29 PM
From: Tadsamillionaire  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 411
 
China is furious as Bush halts UN 'abortion' funds
By Damien McElroy in Beijing
(Filed: 03/02/2002)
A DECISION by President Bush to suspend £24 million of United States funding to a United Nations body accused of assisting forced abortions in China is threatening to cloud his visit to Beijing this month.

By withholding the money from the UN Fund for Population Activities (UNFPA), Mr Bush has made clear his opposition to China's extreme population control methods. Beijing is hoping to extend the controls, which restrict the majority of couples to one child, for another generation.

Beijing is furious with Mr Bush, who has been swayed by reports implicating the UNFPA in abuses of the one-child policy. China's foreign ministry told The Telegraph that the US had not made the "correct choice".

"The allegations by some American congressmen on the UNFPA's support for China's forced abortion and sterilisation operations is totally groundless," said a spokesman. "Some Americans, acting regardless of the facts, have lobbied for the US to cancel its donation to the UNFPA. This is with ulterior intentions, and is unfavourable for international co-operation in population control."
More At......
telegraph.co.uk.