Bureaucrats at the United Nations are floating the idea of a global tax on all financial transactions in order to fund the organization's over-arching, worldwide social services program which would supposedly provide individuals in need all over the world with such basics as free health care, housing, education, and even a basic income level.
The governments of China and Russia blocked a United Nations Security Council resolution calling for Syrian strongman Bashar al-Assad to hand over power, sparking outrage among Western and Arab leaders supposedly concerned about a bloody conflict that has already claimed thousands of lives. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton responded to the UN vetoes by vowing to redouble the Obama administration’s efforts to take down the regime.
A coordinated effort to increase the United Nations’ role in the fields of mental health and substance abuse is now underway, with experts, national governments, and global bureaucracies lobbying for the UN World Health Organization (WHO) to get more involved. Critics of the schemes, however, blasted the notion of a global mental-health regime.
The Western-backed overthrow of Libyan strongman Moammar Gadhafi likely provided huge stocks of heavy weapons to terrorist groups and criminal organizations operating in the Sahel region of North Africa, the United Nations confirmed January 26 in a report. Among the groups benefiting from the arms are al-Qaeda and the deadly Islamic terror organization Boko Haram, which is currently on a killing spree in Nigeria.
“The United Nations does extraordinary good around the world — feeding the hungry, caring for the sick, mending places that have been broken. But it also struggles to enforce its will, and to live up to the ideals of its founding. I believe that those imperfections are not a reason to walk away from this institution — they are a calling to redouble our efforts. The United Nations can either be a place where we bicker about outdated grievances, or forge common ground; a place where we focus on what drives us apart, or what brings us together; a place where we indulge tyranny, or a source of moral authority. In short, the United Nations can be an institution that is disconnected from what matters in the lives of our citizens, or it can be an indispensable factor in advancing the interests of the people we serve.”
This is a follow-up article to yesterday's "Big Push for UN’s International Criminal Court"
The International Criminal Court has been dependent on a vast support network of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) from the get-go. Long before the United Nations 1998 Rome conference which established the ICC, the UN’s army of NGO activists provided boots on the ground for aggressive lobbying of national governments to support creation of the tribunal.
The push is on to empower the International Criminal Court, the United Nations’ global tribunal that claims universal jurisdiction to prosecute individuals for war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, and aggression. Over the past year, the Obama administration, acting primarily through Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, has been ratcheting up the campaign to legitimize the ICC as a global prosecutor and Supreme Court.
Together with a coterie of think tanks, media allies, and non-governmental organizations, the administration is attempting to establish precedents for U.S. participation in, and support for, the ICC action agenda, notwithstanding the fact that the U.S. Senate has not ratified the 1998 Rome Statute establishing the ICC.
Following the examples of other recent White House occupants, President Obama announced in March his decision to commit U.S. military forces in support of the NATO/UN war against Libyan dictator Moamar Gadhafi because “the writ of the international community must be enforced.” The “writ” to which he referred was United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973, passed on March 17 — with prodding from Secretary Clinton and her minions at State.
Two big agencies operating under the umbrella of the United Nations will not make public how they spend their money. UNICEF, the United Nations Children’s Fund, is intended to benefit poor children around the world and UNFPA, the United Nations Population Fund, is intended to provide for global population control. The agencies had $3.2 billion in cash in 2009, and yet they refused to tell the consulting firm IDC hired to prepare a study for the Norwegian development agency called “NORAD” how that money was spent.
The consultants also found that the UN High Commission on Refugees refused to provide some spending information, “particularly staff costs.”
These were not the only United Nations agencies which appeared to have lots of cash lying around. UNDP, the United Nations Development Program, and WFP, the World Food Program, also had large amounts of unspent funds. Among other findings in this report, the UNFPA gave government and non-government organizations $200 million per year in ways which prevented IDC auditors from examining the accounts, and thus the auditors could have “have little knowledge regarding the ultimate destiny” of those funds. These amounted, according to the report, to 30 percent of UNFPA disbursed program money each year.
Government climate dignitaries and the Associated Press hailed the “landmark” deal reached Sunday at the United Nations' global-warming summit in Durban, South Africa. According to environmentalist groups, however, the agreement represented a failure of the 17th Conference of the Parties (COP17) to “save” the world from supposedly “dangerous” carbon dioxide emissions.
Meanwhile, as the official “science” continues to crumble amid colder temperatures and lower sea levels, critics of UN global-warming theories warned that the foundation was being laid for a dangerous global regime with dire consequences for everyone on Earth. And some progress toward the goal was made in Durban.
Experts said the emerging scheme — to be finalized in the coming years — aims to produce a world government and reduce living standards worldwide. The proposed regime would stifle economic activity and extract ever more wealth from populations while doing absolutely nothing at all to prevent what are essentially natural climate variations, according to critics and scientists.
After running over their scheduled time by more than 36 hours, exhausted “negotiators” representing more than 190 regimes — mostly dictatorships — agreed to work out an enforceable treaty by 2015. The global climate regime would enter into force some five years after that.
As the White House released a memorandum outlining President Obama’s strategy for promoting homosexuality globally, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was busy hectoring the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva with the same discordant anthem. Speaking on behalf of the President, Clinton exhorted the UN body concerning the evils of “gay and lesbian discrimination,” reported the Associated Press, “declaring the U.S. will use foreign assistance as well as diplomacy to back its insistence that gay rights are fully equal to other basic human rights.”
Harkening back to rhetoric she used over 15 years ago at a UN confab on women’s rights, Clinton “compared the struggle for gay equality to difficult passages toward women’s rights and racial equality,” noted the AP, “and she said a country’s cultural or religious traditions are no excuse for discrimination.”
“Gay rights are human rights, and human rights are gay rights,” intoned Clinton. “It should never be a crime to be gay.” The Secretary of State’s UN audience included a healthy representation of officials whose cultures are repulsed by the immorality of homosexual acts, and where the retribution for such behavior is wont to reach beyond civilized boundaries.
Hillary made it clear that anything less than the civil — if not loving — embrace of gays, lesbians, transvestites, and other “LGBT persons” wouldn’t fly in an increasingly global community patrolled by U.S.-funded and -encouraged anti-discrimination police.