All Patriotic Americans, I urge you to call your Senators and Representatives...
Todd~AFCL
2012/12/03 16:46:58
I have to thank The Lib Hater for pointing me at this urgent issue and providing me with the necessary information to warn all who wish to remain free.
The Senate is scheduled to vote on the UN's Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, as early as Tuesday, December 4th. I strongly urge all of you who wish the United States of America to remain a sovereign nation, to call your senators and pressure them to vote AGAINST this dangerous treaty. http://cnsnews.com/blog/ken-blackwell/independence-forever-do...
There are provisions within this treaty which could allow the U.N. to strip away portions of our sovereignty, by allowing the UN to decide how how we treat our disabled and have many dangerous and expensive consequences. This would also permit the UN to take away the rights of parents in determining what is best for their children, as it would create a global, one size fits all, standard for all disabled children. If this is not bad enough, the treaty does not define what should be considered disablities, leaving it open to be expanded to almost any area of child rearing a person can imagine.
With this treaty, we would have to listen to such great respecters of human rights as China (with their part in the global war on baby girls.) http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-global-war-aga...
This treaty is being pushed during the Lame Duck session, in hopes of getting it passed now that elections are over. Now, before you any of you libs come at me with George W. Bush signed onto this in 2006, let me make it clear that it did not succeed in getting through both house of Congress to be ratified, after he signed it. This is now 0bama's baby, as he signed it in 2009.
Excerpt taken from http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/180902401.html?r...
"The treaty was signed by the George W. Bush administration in 2006 and
was signed by President Barack Obama in 2009. Kerry's committee approved
it in July on a 13-6 vote but in August Republicans blocked a
Democratic attempt to have the treaty ratified on a voice vote."
You can read all about this in these articles, too.
http://blog.heritage.org/2012/11/28/morning-bell-disabilities...
http://www.frc.org/washingtonupdate/treaty-plants-cede-of-us-...
http://www.un.org/disabilities/default.asp?id=150
http://www.heritage.org/research/testimony/2012/11/convention...
The Senate is scheduled to vote on the UN's Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, as early as Tuesday, December 4th. I strongly urge all of you who wish the United States of America to remain a sovereign nation, to call your senators and pressure them to vote AGAINST this dangerous treaty. http://cnsnews.com/blog/ken-blackwell/independence-forever-do...
There are provisions within this treaty which could allow the U.N. to strip away portions of our sovereignty, by allowing the UN to decide how how we treat our disabled and have many dangerous and expensive consequences. This would also permit the UN to take away the rights of parents in determining what is best for their children, as it would create a global, one size fits all, standard for all disabled children. If this is not bad enough, the treaty does not define what should be considered disablities, leaving it open to be expanded to almost any area of child rearing a person can imagine.
With this treaty, we would have to listen to such great respecters of human rights as China (with their part in the global war on baby girls.) http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-global-war-aga...
This treaty is being pushed during the Lame Duck session, in hopes of getting it passed now that elections are over. Now, before you any of you libs come at me with George W. Bush signed onto this in 2006, let me make it clear that it did not succeed in getting through both house of Congress to be ratified, after he signed it. This is now 0bama's baby, as he signed it in 2009.
Excerpt taken from http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/180902401.html?r...
"The treaty was signed by the George W. Bush administration in 2006 and
was signed by President Barack Obama in 2009. Kerry's committee approved
it in July on a 13-6 vote but in August Republicans blocked a
Democratic attempt to have the treaty ratified on a voice vote."
You can read all about this in these articles, too.
http://blog.heritage.org/2012/11/28/morning-bell-disabilities...
http://www.frc.org/washingtonupdate/treaty-plants-cede-of-us-...
http://www.un.org/disabilities/default.asp?id=150
http://www.heritage.org/research/testimony/2012/11/convention...
http://www.theblaze.com/stori...
http://www2.ohchr.org/english...
Agenda 21 - its a prime example that is impossible to argue against.
The problem with the UN is it requires 'trickle down' adoption of its principles; I work in one of the biggest companies in the world, and they apply a similar principle.
All it does is turn the top tiers into cumbersome beasts who become unproductive and move slowly, always reliant on productivity from the troops slugging away at the bottom.
Then the troops at the bottom see the guys at the top living in their ivory tower and complain wanting more entitlements...productivity then exponentially drops.
The whole company thus finds it increasingly hard to be dynamic, react to change and compete against their competition at a global level; their growth slows more.
Smaller companies begin to take work from them, operating abroad or locally providing dynamic services the 'beast' can no longer deliver.
Then the ONLY thing keeping the beast alive, is the other beasts it services...it is entirely reliant on the same business model in other businesses keeping them as reliant on it. The chicken and egg principle then applies and people can't accept the fact their strategy was wrong; pointing fingers el...
Agenda 21 - its a prime example that is impossible to argue against.
The problem with the UN is it requires 'trickle down' adoption of its principles; I work in one of the biggest companies in the world, and they apply a similar principle.
All it does is turn the top tiers into cumbersome beasts who become unproductive and move slowly, always reliant on productivity from the troops slugging away at the bottom.
Then the troops at the bottom see the guys at the top living in their ivory tower and complain wanting more entitlements...productivity then exponentially drops.
The whole company thus finds it increasingly hard to be dynamic, react to change and compete against their competition at a global level; their growth slows more.
Smaller companies begin to take work from them, operating abroad or locally providing dynamic services the 'beast' can no longer deliver.
Then the ONLY thing keeping the beast alive, is the other beasts it services...it is entirely reliant on the same business model in other businesses keeping them as reliant on it. The chicken and egg principle then applies and people can't accept the fact their strategy was wrong; pointing fingers elsewhere.
Then, when the economy supporting the business sector slows; ALL the beastly organisations suffer and seek for smaller more dynamic aid. From global competitors. Joint ventures etc...
This is where the beast who begun as a manufacturing powerhouse finally becomes a consumer itself; sending money abroad and dropping to critically low levels of productivity.
All the while shareholders become increasingly aware that they can always move their money somewhere else with higher growth (abroad).
This is where we are at as a company, which funnily enough coincides exactly with where America is as a nation.
I think we all know where its headed next.
If you don't even remember those, you are even more deluded than I thought.
Your so-called openly torturing people is an accusation without merit, and so are your claims about the United States started wars of aggression at every chance. WE SHOULD withdraw from the UN and let you go to one of those disgusting countries that you seem to think should be telling us what to do.
Neither the war in Afghanistan nor Iraq were authorised by the UN, were BY DEFINITION in VIOLATION of INTERNATIONAL LAW, and BY DEFINITION ILLEGAL.