Will Barack Obama comply with even one on a so-called global scale?
From what little was reported and actually said during the joint 'press conference' today at the White House...
Obama hails special relationship
...Mr Brown, who will host a summit of the Group of 20 (G20) developed and emerging economies in London on 2 April, said there had to be a "global new deal" to ensure cross-border supervision of banking.
The leaders shared a "common interest" in pursuing this, he added.
Mr Obama also urged coordinated action, saying: "All of these steps, I think, are going to slowly build confidence but it is not going to happen yet.
"We together have dug a very deep hole for ourselves. There were a lot of bad decisions that were made. We are cleaning up that mess.
"There are going to be fits and starts in getting the mess cleaned up but it is going to get cleaned up and we will emerge more prosperous, more unified and more protected from systemic risks."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/7918345.stm
Why should he not comply with even one?
Unconstitutional. Pretty simple. Our Founding Fathers warned of international entanglements. We're in so deep, our nation is nearly unrecognizable. Globalists were under the radar, silent about plans in the works for decades and decades. Now, they are blatantly proposing global involvement unlike anything we've seen before.
Richard Haas, president of the Council on Foreign Relations has appeared on Joe Scarborough Country (with Mica B'. co-hosting) any number of times in just the past few months.
On several of those occasions, Pat Buchanan sat in the same studio, across from Haas, but asked nothing about that council and suspicions the agenda of that organization has been supportive of global institutions if not directly involved, and possibly global government.
Not one question.
Don't be surprised if you see Pat back off the Nafta superhighway very soon, too.
The NAFTA super highway August 29, 2006
http://townhall.com/columnists/PatrickJBuchanan/2006/08/29/the_nafta_super_highway
Review of Pat Buchanan's book Death of the West
Can America be saved? Patrick Buchanan expresses virtually no hope in The Death of the West. The John Birch Society holds a contrary point of view. (Cultural Currents).
...Nor does Buchanan discuss the role played by organizations of the internationalist Power Elite, such as the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR CFR
See: Cost and Freight ) and the Trilateral CommissionTrilateral Commission
From the site at Trilateral.org:
The Trilateral Commission is a non-governmental policy-oriented discussion group of about 325 distinguished citizens from North America, the European Union, and Japan which seeks to foster mutual issues for which these
..... Click the link for more information. (TC) -- which didn't rate as much as a single mention in The Death of the West. This is a curious omission indeed, given that Buchanan's syndicated columns have been replete with mentions of such organizations and their efforts to undermine our national sovereignty.
This surprising amnesia is coupled with an unfortunate enthusiasm for the administration of George W. Bush, which -- like that of George Bush the elder -- teems with officials drawn from the CFR and TC. For example, Buchanan writes: "Mr. Gore may have slipped his Kyoto Protocol by customs, Mr. Clinton may have signed us on to the UN International Criminal Court, but Mr. Bush has repudiated Kyoto and he opposes the ICCICC
See: International Chamber of Commerce
..... Click the link for more information.."
However, while President Bush has (for now) rejected the Kyoto Protocol, he has embraced the radical environmentalists' global warming myth. For example, on February 14th, speaking at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationNoun 1. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration - an agency in the Department of Commerce that maps the oceans and conserves their living resources; predicts changes to the earth's environment; provides weather reports and forecasts floods and hurricanes and
..... Click the link for more information., the president pointedly expressed support for "the United Nations Framework Convention and its central goal, to stabilize atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations at a level that will prevent dangerous human interference with the climate. Our immediate goal is to reduce America's greenhouse gas emissions relative to the size of our economy."
Toward that end, continued Mr. Bush, "My administration is committed to cutting our nation's greenhouse gas intensity -- how much we emit per unit of economic activity -- by 18 percent over the next 10 years."
The Bush administration's treatment of the International Criminal Court -- which would claim jurisdiction to try Americans before panels of foreign judges for offenses against UN "international law" -- has been similarly equivocal. Comments Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas): "The Bush Administration has admirably stated its opposition to the International Criminal Court, but it unfortunately has taken no proactive measures to 'unsign' Clinton's initial signature or to make it known that the United States has no intention of cooperating with, providing funding to, or recognizing any authority of this international court." But it would be a mistake to suggest that the Bush administration's stance on the ICC has been purely defensive; in fact, it has actually surrendered vital ground.
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Can+America+be+saved%3F+Patrick+Buchanan+expresses+virtually+no+hope+in...-a084650467
Secular Humanism conspiracy
http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/b/buchanan-pat/berlet-01.html
No comments:
Post a Comment