It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by justwokeup
Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by boymonkey74
We aren't a Banana Republic
No, not yet, but depending on the definition you use its the path america is going down.
"In practice, a banana republic is a country operated as a commercial enterprise for private profit, effected by the collusion between the State and favoured monopolies, whereby the profits derived from private exploitation of public lands is private property, and the debts incurred are public responsibility. Such an imbalanced economy reduces the national currency to devalued paper-money, hence, the country is ineligible for international development-credit, and remains limited by the uneven economic development of town and country.[5] Kleptocracy, government by thieves, features influential government employees exploiting their posts for personal gain (embezzlement, fraud, bribery, etc.), with the resultant government budget deficit repaid by the native working people who earn money, rather than make money"
...
President Barack Obama has already captured glowing endorsements from Russian President Vladimir Putin and the pro-Marxist Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, so of course the United Nations would show a united Socialist front to boost Obama’s $1 billion re-election bid for the White House
The Daily Caller reports that, “the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Counter-Terrorism and Human Rights has claimed that if Mitt Romney is elected president of the United States next month, he will be ‘the first world leader in history to be able to claim a democratic mandate for torture.’”
UN’s Ben Emmerson granted an exclusive interview with The Canadian Press. He said, “there is no doubt the that the Romney administration would be able to claim – in the event of a Romney presidency – a democratic mandate for torture.’”
Originally posted by Hefficide
Imagine that... a Florida Republican concerned about outside entities watching the elections.
~Cough.... cough.... hanging chad... cough~
Source
Assessed contributions are payments made as part of the obligations that nations undertake when signing treaties. Assessed contributions are vital as they are the primary source of reliable funding for UN core activities, such as peacekeeping. For example, the U.S. is assessed 22 percent of the UN’s regular budget and 27 percent of the UN’s peacekeeping operations budget. However, an outdated Congressional mandate caps U.S. expenditures at 25 percent of the UN’s peacekeeping budget.
Originally posted by zilebeliveunknown
Originally posted by badgerprints
US membership in the UN has no tangible benefit for US citizens.
It has, well unless US political establishment would like to rule the whole world which is dangerous.
There has to be consensus on the global level, one power cannot have it all.
Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
"However, groups and individuals from outside the United States are not allowed to influence or interfere with the election process in Texas. This State has robust election laws that were carefully crafted to protect the integrity of our election system. All persons -- including persons connected with OSCE -- are required to comply with these laws."
Originally posted by Kr0nZ
So having a foreign entity, enter and destabilizer another country is all fine and dandy, its in the name of corruption.
But when it happens in your backyard. they have no business being there... Hypocrites much?
Originally posted by Rebroadcast
As one poster said earlier, I bet most US citizens support their government interfering in foreign political elections, I reckon most US citizens support their government installing dictators in foreign nations, most don't find a single thing wrong with placing enormous military bases in countries with names they can't pronounce who's people do not want them there, but the second someone suggests sending a few observers to the US polling stations, they get all angry and affronted.
US hypocrisy and arrogance knows absolutely no bounds.
I'll play.
Originally posted by projectvxn
The UN is made up mostly of dictatorships.
What does that make the UN? I say this congressman is right.
Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by Tw0Sides
Sure if that was the goal of the UN. Their real agenda is global governance. Under such an organization only world dictatorship could be realized.
Originally posted by boymonkey74
They are there as a neutral party to make sure your elections are fair and square.
If you did kick the UN out you would become a very lonely super power.
But just because one nutty congressman says they should doesn't mean they will.edit on 28-10-2012 by boymonkey74 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by OptimusSubprime
Originally posted by boymonkey74
They are there as a neutral party to make sure your elections are fair and square.
If you did kick the UN out you would become a very lonely super power.
But just because one nutty congressman says they should doesn't mean they will.edit on 28-10-2012 by boymonkey74 because: (no reason given)
The UN has destroyed all sovereignty in America. The UN is a domestic enemy of the US Constitution. The UN and anyone who supports it can go directly to HELL. America's elections are none of the UN's business. In fact, NOTHING America does is the UN's business. If it wasn't for American taxpayers footing the bill, there would be no UN.
Originally posted by OptimusSubprime
If it wasn't for American taxpayers footing the bill, there would be no UN.