Old film shows Paul warning of UN plot
Conspiracy theories are nothing new to Ron Paul. Witness his lengthy appearance in this 1998 John Birch Society documentary, in which he predicts that the United Nations “would confiscate our guns’ and the rest of Americans’ private property. The United States, he says in the video, “will become nothing more than a pawn of the United Nations.”
“The election process will become the task of world government monitors,” the documentary’s narrator says at the 2:16 mark. “The U.S. Congress, president, judicial system and state and local government shall exist only as a facade to assure American citizens that they still have a voice in government.”
The documentary goes on to suggest the UN could disband and even burn down U.S. churches that don’t submit to its control, and throw their ministers in jail (3:15). Paul chimes in: “If the United Nations has their way, there will be curtailment of our right to practice religion,” he is shown saying (4:12).
“Citizens who attempt to defend whatever freedoms they have remaining will join the victims of the inevitable brutality and bloodbath carried out by a tyrannical UN dictatorship,” the narrator says at the 4:40 mark.
Here’s the video (h/t Andrew Kaczynski):
Credit: Akaczynski1/YouTube
Obama defends Libya policy during hectic New York day
President Barack Obama followed up his speech to the nation defending his Libya policy on Monday night with a whirlwind visit to New York City. He explained the policy in three network news interviews (ABC, NBC, CBS) — at the city’s famed Museum of Natural History.
Then he made a quick visit to a kids’ science fair, joking to the high school students that they are smarter than he is, before dedicating the new Ronald H. Brown U.S. Mission to the United Nations building.
There his Libya strategy was applauded by a roomful of diplomats and endorsed by a Democratic predecessor, ex-President Bill Clinton, the husband of his secretary of state.
“I had to apologize to President Clinton before we walked out because he never sees his wife,” Obama joked as he began his remarks. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was flying back from her latest overseas mission — a quick trip to London for an international conference on Libya.
Bill Clinton got big applause at the dedication of the new U.S. Mission to the UN when he said Brown, who was his commerce secretary and died in a plane crash while traveling to the Balkans, would have approved of the action in Libya.
“He would be very proud that Barack Obama became president of the United States, and very proud of you, Mr. President, for what you are doing in Libya, with the international community.”
Mohammed Albdel-Rahman Shalgam, who was Libya’s UN ambassador until he spoke out against Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, and all of the ambassadors from UN Security Council member countries were in the audience.
Obama urges leaders to work harder for peace
U.S. President Barack Obama, mixing with other world leaders at the the United Nations on Thursday over lunch, toasted the organization and urged his dining companions to work harder for peace.
“In the months and years ahead, the challenges we face will require the work of all nations and all peoples … it will require the leadership of everybody in this room,” he said.
Obama arrived late for the lunch after a bilateral meeting with Chinese premier Wen Jiabao, waving and greeting other leaders as they tucked into pate on toast and sipped chilled white Burgundy wine.
Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe glanced over his shoulder as Obama walked past his table, and then resumed his lunch.
Obama sat between U.N. Secretary General Ban ki Moon and Uganda’s Yoweri Museveni. Also at the Obama table were Turkish President Abdullah Gul, Colombia’s Juan Manuel Santos, King Abdullah II of Jordan, and Nigeria’s Goodluck Jonathan, in his trademark black hat.
“I want to propose a toast to Secretary General Ban and the spirit that brings us here today. Until we insist not only on peace and progress but that we are also willing to work for it and sacrifice for it. Cheers,” Obama said to loud applause.
U.S. lawmakers wonder, where did our love go? with Turkey
It almost sounded as if U.S. lawmakers felt jilted by Washington’s long-time NATO ally Turkey.
“How do we get Turkey back?” demanded Representative Gary Ackerman at a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing exploring “Turkey’s New Foreign Policy Direction.”
“Why is Turkish public opinion … perhaps one of the most anti-American of any of the countries of the world?” asked the committee’s chairman, Representative Howard Berman.
With a panel of experts on Turkey listening, Berman and other lawmakers listed their worries about recent Turkish policy turns on Iran, Israel and the Palestinians.
Concerns about Turkey had hit a new peak with its support of an aid convoy of ships that tried to run the Israeli blockade of the Gaza strip this summer, Berman said.
Turkey’s contacts with the Islamist group Hamas — which won the 2006 Palestinian parliamentary election — are “deeply offensive,” Berman continued, and show Turkey doesn’t respect Washington’s list of foreign terrorist organizations (Hamas is on it).
And Turkey effectively dissed the United States again this week when its finance minister said it would boost trade with Iran, while ignoring non-United Nations sanctions, said Berman, the author of recent tough new unilateral U.S. sanctions on Tehran.
Where is berman getting his info? Israel created the rift between turkey & zion state; turkey aware of israels terrorism and they need to acknowledge Hamas as representative of the Palestinians; israel can’t go around picking who THEY like to represent Palestine. Israel is a terrorist apartheid state=RACISM usa gives billions to israel as they ethnically cleanse palestinians.Iran & the whole region need to protect themselves against Israel!-Crimes in internatl.waters, massive murders of Turkish citizens, trying to help Palestine!
from Global News Journal:
Obama, Susan Rice and the U.N. — The right approach or too cuddly?
U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, briefs press at the White House.
When U.S. President Barack Obama came to power, he announced a "new era of engagement" at the United Nations. He appointed his longtime friend and foreign policy adviser Susan Rice to be his ambassador to the world body. He also raised her post to cabinet level, as some previous Democratic presidents have done, and made her a member of the powerful National Security Council.
In an August 2009 speech at New York University, Rice outlined the Obama's administration's new approach to the United Nations, an organization that was often criticized and occasionally ridiculed by members of the administration of former President George W. Bush. She said that from now on Washington would do away with the "condescension and contempt" that she said had crept into U.S. government attitudes toward the international community.
"We have seen the costs of disengagement," Rice told an audience of students, academics, diplomats and policy makers. "We have paid the price of stiff-arming the U.N. and spurning our international partners. The United States will lead in the 21st century -- not with hubris, not by hectoring, but through patient diplomacy."
Relations between the United States and the United Nations have never been easy. For decades there have been the occasional calls from the political right to pull out of the organization or banish its headquarters from U.S. territory. Relations reached a low point in 2003, the year of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. Former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan branded the war an illegal act by the Bush administration.
The Obama administration kept its word. It quickly handed over more than $2 billion in new and old contributions owed to the U.N. peacekeeping department. It ended Washington's confrontational approach to the world body, virtually ceasing all public attacks on it. In an interview with Vogue magazine, for which she was photographed by Annie Leibovitz, Rice said she believed she had met all of the other 191 U.N. ambassadors in the space of a single month. Envoys from around the world praised Rice, saying her willingness to listen and not dictate to her colleagues is refreshing. One senior Western diplomat referred to her as "Human Rice." But some in the United States dislike this approach. Security Council diplomats have told Reuters privately that Rice's frequent absences from council meetings -- including votes on resolutions -- have not gone unnoticed. U.N. blogger Matthew Lee of Inner City Press has repeatedly suggested that Rice has dropped the U.S. push to root out U.N. corruption and improve its bureaucracy, an issue that was top priority for former U.S. ambassador and outspoken U.N. critic John Bolton. (U.S. officials reject the suggestion that Washington has dropped its anti-corruption drive.) Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a Republican from Florida, criticized the Obama administration for taking a seat on the U.N. Human Rights Council, a body Washington had previously shunned for being anti-Israeli. Rice and others defended the decision, saying it was time to change the Human Rights Council from within rather than throwing stones at it from without.
She’s a disgrace–clearly embraces Obama’s increasingly unpopular agenda, including his incomprehensible animus toward Israel, the Mideast’s only democracy and the U.S.’ best and only reliable ally there.
Although she recently vetoed the umpteenth Security Council resolution aimed @ bashing courageous and peace-seeking little Israel, after the vote she delivered an incredibly nasty tirade against Israel, its “settlements”, how they’re the biggest impediment to peace, etc.,etc. Never mind the literally thousands of murderous terror attacks there as well as worldwide by Islamic fundamentalist wackos–which somehow don’t seem of much concern to Ms. Rice at all!
She has become very unpopular in the U.S.and is at risk of being removed, which for many can’t be soon enough.
The First Draft: Team Obama’s Full-Court Press on Climate
As a drippy day dawns in Washington, Team Obama is suiting up for a full-court press on climate change. Three cabinet secretaries — from Energy, Transportation and Interior departments — the head of the EPA and the chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Five — are headed for the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee on the first of three full days of hearings.
As those hearings go forward, President Barack Obama is announcing a $3.4 billion program to build a “smart” electric grid, which would among other things carry solar and wind power, which are free of carbon emissions.
It’s all meant to convince international climate negotiators that Washington is serious about tackling climate change. A global gathering set for Copenhagen in December aims to set up a system to curb climate-warming carbon emissions after the Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012. For months, environmental activists have looked to the Copenhagen meeting as a deadline for action. But now, the deadline is looking a bit blurry.
U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon appeared to acknowledge this when he told business leaders in Seattle on Monday, “We will do our best and try to have a substantive agreement (in Copenhagen) … After Copenhagen we may not expect … to agree on all elements. But we should have a broad agreement.”
Ban’s climate adviser made clear the secretary-general was planning for “post-Copenhagen” talks.
The international environmental community has said repeatedly that the United States needs to take the lead in forging a global climate agreement. But what would show U.S. leadership? Does a climate change bill have to come to a vote in the Senate? Does it just have to get out to committee? Does it need to land on the president’s desk before the Copenhagen meeting? Is it enough that legislation seems to be moving forward?
And an even more basic question: do you agree that the United States needs to lead on this? If so, would it make a difference if Obama attends the Copenhagen meeting? (He’s going to be in the neighborhood anyway to pick up his Nobel Peace Prize.)
The proposed Cap and Trade regime is based on a false premise, that CO2 drives climate change. The data do not support this at all. The science is not settled. I would hope the United States would take the lead in getting the science straight first. I’m all for alternate energy development for the purpose of conservation and energy independence, but CO2 is not the problem – it’s a plant food.
Senate rebukes Libya, and it wasn’t for Gaddafi’s speech…
Coincidence? Maybe.
The U.S. Senate rebuked Libya Wednesday during the nearly two-hour speech that leader Muammar Gaddafi gave to the U.N. General Assembly in New York.
While Gaddafi was excoriating world powers in his first address to the United Nations, the Senate approved a resolution condemning the “lavish” welcome home ceremony that Libya gave last month for a convicted Lockerbie bomber and demanding an apology for the celebration.
Gaddafi’s words, heard through the lively voice of the translator, went on for nearly two hours at the U.N. podium, raising some questions about whether the U.N. had time limits on speeches.
It seems the first translator exhausted himself about 90 minutes in and another — somewhat calmer — voice took over.
But not before the first one had a chance to rattle off Gadaffi’s musings on everything including who killed JFK.
While Gaddafi praised President Barack Obama in his speech, the U.S. president didn’t hear it first-hand. White House spokesman Robert Gibbs says Obama didn’t watch the Libyan leader’s speech.
Gaddafi is only a clown in the greatest circus on planet earth; the UN
Obama takes on anti-Americanism, calls for new era
President Barack Obama began his first speech before the U.N. General Assembly by taking on the anti-Americanism that spread overseas in the aftermath of the 2003 invasion of Iraq (six years before his presidency).
“I took office at a time when many around the world had come to view America with skepticism and distrust,” he told world leaders.
Misperceptions, misinformation, opposition to U.S. policies, and a belief that the United States acted unilaterally “fed an almost reflexive anti-Americanism which, too often, has served as an excuse for collective inaction,” Obama said.
He called for embracing “a new era of engagement based on mutual interest and mutual respect.”
Obama basically put on the line his hopes for a new chapter in U.S. relations with other countries, and made clear that he was breaking from the unpopular policies of his predecessor, former President George W. Bush.
He ticked off action taken on issues of friction, saying he has prohibited torture, ordered Guantanamo Bay prison closed and worked on combating extremism “within the rule of law.”
At home, Obama faces Republican and conservative critics who question whether he is tough enough on national security.
eric h the latest report states that we probably will never get the money back from AIG,and if they can get away with it then Obama auto,s will try to pull the same stunt.
The First Draft: Gaddafi, the tent and The Donald
Official Washington is gazing northward this morning toward New York and the United Nations, where President Barack Obama will be followed in the General Assembly by Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi. The big question in the blogosphere is not what Obama will tell the gathered diplomats of the world — the White House has indicated he will stress a new tone in foreign policy — but where Gaddafi spent the night.
Unlike the rest of the assembled envoys, Gaddafi prefers a Bedouin tent to a hotel (hates elevators, reportedly) but his plans to pitch a tent in the suburban town of Bedford, New York, hit a snag with local authorities. Construction of the tent, featuring draperies with a camel print, was halted on Tuesday. ABC News reported that he bedded down in Manhattan close to the United Nations.
The titillation factor grew when it was discovered that the estate in Bedford was owned by none other than Donald Trump, New York real estate magnate and publicity magnet extraordinaire.
The morning TV news programs — NBC, ABC, CNN, CBS, FOX — all featured stories, with video of the tent under construction. A quick Web search for tent+bedford+libya (leaving out Gaddafi’s name because of the various spellings of it) resulted in 227,000 hits.
There are plenty of critical issues before the United Nations General Assembly (and the G20 in Pittsburgh) this week: nuclear weapons proliferation, Middle East conflict, climate change, the global economic slump. So why is this the issue that’s grabbing the headlines? Is it because it’s something to spark outrage? Laugh at? Because of all the gnarly problems of the world, this is one that at least is comprehensible? Let us know what you think.
Photo credits: REUTERS/Hugo Correia (Gaddafi in his tent outside Lisbon, Portugal, December 6, 2007)
REUTERS/Chris Helgren (Tent for Gaddafi pitched on the grounds of an Italian villa in Rome, June 9, 2009)
While Bush was in office the guy made all sorts of concessions,even volunteered to gave up his quest to seek weapons of mass destruction,why?because he saw what happened to Iraq.Why the change in attitude?because he is watching his “son”Obama the apologist, and is he on board! NO. like ahmadinejad he knows Obama is only a talking head and there is nothing to worry about,
So what’s the carbon footprint of a motorcade?
World leaders in New York City for the U.N. General Assembly also bring motorcades, gridlock, and idling engines.
So when White House reporters, also in New York following President Barack Obama around, got a briefing on U.N. climate change talks, the question had to be asked.
CBS’s Mark Knoller wondered about the carbon footprint of the summit: could the earnest statements on climate change be undermined by motorcades, gridlock, idling engines?
The answer: electric motorcades!
(Would that mean electric sockets on every corner in midtown Manhattan?)
“I think the U.N. should make a pledge to electric vehicle motorcades within five years,” U.S. climate negotiator Todd Stern told reporters.
Photo credit: Reuters/Kai Pfaffenbach (power plug is seen next to an electric-drive car)
I’ll believe in global warming and carbon footprints when the people that keep telling me to believe it act they believe it. Its all ‘smoke & mirrors’ to make some people very, very, richer. As usual, follow the money. Al Gore and his cronies come to mind. Does anyone seriously believe that China, India and other developing countries will adhere to the global warming scam? They’re going to say that the USA had had its industrial revolution and now its their turn, carbon footprints and global warming be damned.
Reuters is owned by the richest man in Canada.