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.

 

United Nations should be kicked off US soil: US congressman

page: 3
11
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 03:11 PM
link   
I don't see what the problem is.

As Republicans/Conservatives are so often fond of saying when they want to spy on you, "If you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear."




posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 


We do. And I for one am against spending money on a world authority who in time will quash US national sovereignty and have us pay for it in the process.

As to your assertion that the UN isn't run by dictatorships, I look to the membership list. They may not be listed as dictatorships, but just because they aren't on the list doesn't mean they don't have authoritarian governments.

The UN is also a breeding ground for one worlders who wish to bring the World under the direct control of a single governing body.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 03:14 PM
link   
The US was the one who wanted that crappy organization in the first place.... GOOD ONE



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by daskakik
 

We do. And I for one am against spending money on a world authority who in time will quash US national sovereignty and have us pay for it in the process.

While I understand, I also realize that that is the same sentiment that southerners have about being forced to be part of the United States while at the same time claiming the US is the best country in the world.


As to your assertion that the UN isn't run by dictatorships, I look to the membership list. They may not be listed as dictatorships, but just because they aren't on the list doesn't mean they don't have authoritarian governments.

Got something to back this up. How authoritarian does a country have to be to be considered a "dictatorship"?


The UN is also a breeding ground for one worlders who wish to bring the World under the direct control of a single governing body.

True, but it is, according to americans, under the best form of government ever conceived. So what's the problem?


edit on 28-10-2012 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 03:32 PM
link   
I find some of the posts on here, with people getting all puffed up and shouring about "sovereignty" etc hilarious!


I have seen similar stuff before, alarmist posts about sightings of "foreign troops" on US soil, and how this cannot be tolerated. I have to wonder sometimes at the mental state of people who post such things... are they completely ignorant and so dumbed down that they seriously think everyone is out to get them and take over the country?


Lets start with this latest UN election monitoring shall we? A small group of monitors (under 100) are supposedly going to "interfere" with the election process and manipulate the outcome. What planet are some of these inbred hicks on that think such things? The US, like many other sovereign states regularly allow election monitoring by UN observers, in fact, we criticise other states and accuse them of dictatorship if they don't allow it.


The UN pushes US policy all the time, thanks to payoffs and coercion of others states, so the return on investment is actually quite beneficial to the US government and the corporate and banking community. The whole "coalition of the willing" that war criminal Bush touted as having UN approval for the invasion of Iraq was only there due to payoffs and bribes.
Let us also not forget the US bases all over the globe. Are those in the US who wet their pants at the thought of foreign troops on their soil also willing to accept that perhaps not everyone is happy with their bases on OUR soil? No doubt they'd view calls for US forces in my country to get the hell out as being an "unfriendly" gesture, like they have some right to be here.


Some people just seem so detached from reality these days, displaying such high levels of paranoia that I wonder if they are on meds or just plain stupid? For a country that has become the de facto superpower, it's people sure are a bunch of dumbasses!



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 03:36 PM
link   
Of course people are sensitive about this issue - especially the more conservative folks. After all, if we'd have had election oversight from an outside body in 2000, the history books would probably be vastly different and we'd be on ATS discussing how President Gore handled the 9/11 crisis.

You cannot steal an election with a bunch of busy bodies running around.


~Heff



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 03:45 PM
link   
I apologise if my earlier post may have come across as maybe a little inflammatory to some across the pond.
I don't tar all with the same brush, but do despair at times at the levels of ignorance and paranoia shown by many.

Not that the people here in dear old Blighty are much better these days!



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by daskakik
 


We do. And I for one am against spending money on a world authority who in time will quash US national sovereignty and have us pay for it in the process.

As to your assertion that the UN isn't run by dictatorships, I look to the membership list. They may not be listed as dictatorships, but just because they aren't on the list doesn't mean they don't have authoritarian governments.

The UN is also a breeding ground for one worlders who wish to bring the World under the direct control of a single governing body.


So we should go back to the days before the UN and have global wars on a regular basis? The UN for all its problems has played a large role in ending conflicts over borders and other minor issues and has played a huge role humanitarian issues. At the same time the US has used it to push it agenda world wide. Of course the UN no real authority but, it does give the world a way to work together on common issues. The idea of the US leaving the UN is beyond stupid. Talk about cutting your own throat. That would make the US the one outsider on the entire planet. And we participate in election monitoring around the globe and have had it here for a decade. They observe and report and what a nation does with that report is up to them. It is not like this is something new. And unless you were trying to pull a fast one why would anybody have a problem with it.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Britguy
I apologise if my earlier post may have come across as maybe a little inflammatory to some across the pond.
I don't tar all with the same brush, but do despair at times at the levels of ignorance and paranoia shown by many.

Not that the people here in dear old Blighty are much better these days!


Sorry but you have nothing to apologise for. This is US hypocrisy on a grand scale, and whilst the US continues to fund dictatorships, oppression of entire nations, interfere in surrounding nations' politics and bases its military around the world, oftentimes causing massive problems between countries, every single person has the duty to combat this abuse of the world by the US, aided by the total lack of action from it's populace.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheComte
I don't see what the problem is.

As Republicans/Conservatives are so often fond of saying when they want to spy on you, "If you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear."


The problem is that you are lazy. Yes I said lazy. You and everyone else that thinks its ok for the UN to do your job. Yes thats right. YOUR JOB. I assume you can read as you have posted on this board. Now go read your states voting laws. YOU are the election monitor. If you see any election laws being broken, march your but up to whoever is in charge at your polling place and tell them what law is being broken and demand they do something about it. It works! I did it myself last election. Someone was campaigning to close to the building and when I did MY JOB they were asked to leave.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by ohioriver

Originally posted by TheComte
I don't see what the problem is.

As Republicans/Conservatives are so often fond of saying when they want to spy on you, "If you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear."


The problem is that you are lazy. Yes I said lazy. You and everyone else that thinks its ok for the UN to do your job. Yes thats right. YOUR JOB. I assume you can read as you have posted on this board. Now go read your states voting laws. YOU are the election monitor. If you see any election laws being broken, march your but up to whoever is in charge at your polling place and tell them what law is being broken and demand they do something about it. It works! I did it myself last election. Someone was campaigning to close to the building and when I did MY JOB they were asked to leave.


This right here.

'nuff said.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 
Heff, you know I respect your opinions and your well informed approach to just about everything you get involved with, but on this, I must take issue.

The 2000 election is past history. Very happily past history and we're all hoping, I think, we don't see a repeat in a few days. Oh..anything but that. However, since you bring it up...2000 was about sore losers not fundamental fairness in the system. Even PBS....that super right bastion of conservative values...agrees Gore lost and WOULD have lost regardless. The margin would have changed...but Sore Loser would still have BEEN Sore Loser if he'd had his recount or not.


In the first full study of Florida's ballots since the election ended, The Miami Herald and USA Today reported George W. Bush would have widened his 537-vote victory to a 1,665-vote margin if the recount ordered by the Florida Supreme Court would have been allowed to continue, using standards that would have allowed even faintly dimpled "undervotes" -- ballots the voter has noticeably indented but had not punched all the way through -- to be counted.

The study, conducted by the accounting firm of BDO Seidman, counted over 60,000 votes in Florida's 67 counties, tabulating separate vote totals in several standards categories.



In all, the newspapers' recount cost more than $500,000 and employed 27 accountants.
Source


We don't even have to speculate about what 'might have been' since the Media conducted their own high dollar recount of the whole shooting match just to see 'what if...'. I imagine they were spending a half million dollars to get a different result and bash Bush mercilessly over the head for years, but lo and behold, it the fair and raw numbers didn't come that way. Bush won, Gore lost...even if by a whisker.

Oddly enough, I'm seeing a number of outlets talk now about a real possibility where Obama may WIN the Electoral College vote and Romney could win the Popular vote. Talk about shoe on the other foot.
You know though, I can't be a hypocrite. IF that comes to pass, Obama will have won...and I won't bitch one bit about the SYSTEM having come out that way.

Popular vote is not the vote for President and it hasn't been since the Founding Fathers wrote the whole thing up. (almost) It never CAN be if we are to be a Union of States and not a Nation having simple State divisions. The two concepts are night and day different and the definition of Democracy vs. Republic. We're a Republic, of course.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide

Of course people are sensitive about this issue - especially the more conservative folks. After all, if we'd have had election oversight from an outside body in 2000, the history books would probably be vastly different and we'd be on ATS discussing how President Gore handled the 9/11 crisis.

You cannot steal an election with a bunch of busy bodies running around.


~Heff


I might take that as anything but a joke if the left didn't work so hard to fight a basic voter ID program.
edit on 28-10-2012 by badgerprints because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 05:03 PM
link   
reply to post by DarthMuerte
 


Iran has the exact same thing to say about the UN.

Just saying.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 06:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


To me, this just makes the U.S look incompetent....

We have never needed the UN to monitor before, why start now??
It makes us look weak to the other countries.....

In the OP article, it said that 44 people were going to be sent over here....

Soooo......which polls are they going to "monitor"?
Just curious how they are going to choose, unless they pick the states that are the "high stake" states...

And the gov. of Texas told them that according to the law, they must obey the perimeters set around the polling stations.
Also the Texas’ State Attorney General Greg Abbott has threatened to arrest any United Nations election monitors who violate Texas Elections Law in the run up to the General Election on November 6th.
[Don't Mess With Texas]

"Come on, I dare you", he says to the UN official, "I dare you to step across THIS line......". hee,hee


Oh boy, I can see the headlines now:
"Texas arrests 2 dozen UN officials...all hell has broke loose"

[just kidding for those that don't know it's a joke]



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 07:02 PM
link   
reply to post by UltraMarine
 


According to this, not sure if accurate, but NAACP and ACLU had a hand in the UN coming here:

U.N. to Monitor U.S. Conservatives at Polls On Election Day


The far-left NAACP and the ACLU have invited U.N. poll watchers from member nations of the U.N. to monitor our polling stations on election day. The action is aimed at maligning conservatives and republicans for allegedly trying to suppress the minority vote, by claiming they need to watched by this international group.


I thought every thing was under control last year by the New Black Panther group.......[sarcasm]

Evidently they didn't do any thing wrong being as the DOJ dropped the charges....

Will they be monitored as well by the UN ???????

[just curious...]

Or just the ferocious Republicans/Conservatives......



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 07:04 PM
link   
Does that mean the world can invade US and take their Nukes because it's not safe?



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 09:16 PM
link   
I wonder how the UN will handle the Black Panthers if they try to intimidate voters like they did in 2008? Here's an excerpt from WIKI on the incident for those of you who forgot or were not informed.

The conduct for which members of the New Black Panther Party were accused of voter intimidation took place on Election Day in November 2008, at a polling station in a predominantly African-American, Democratic voting district of Philadelphia. Two members of the New Black Panther party, Minister King Samir Shabazz, and Jerry Jackson, stood in front of the entrance to the polling station in uniforms that have been described as military or paramilitary. Minister King Shabazz carried a billy club, and is reported to have pointed it at voters while both men shouted racial slurs, including phrases such as "white devil" and "you're about to be ruled by the black man, cracker."

Now really...what will the UN do when they are confronted with a situation like this. Ooh, will they "condem" this behavior? Maybe the Secretary-General will send in "Peacekeepers" to sort through the riff-raff? In the United States? HAHAHA!!! It would be a disaster. It would spark a race war. The US government knows this, and everyone knows the UN has not, can not, will not take action without the bessing of the US government. The UN does not have the stones to send troops onto US soil for peacekeeping actions. So it's all bark, no bite. Let the UN monitor the elections, it will have no effect.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 10:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Siberbat
 

They would probably just report it to local authorities. Then hand a report over to the feds noting that this may be something to look out for in future elections.

Seeing that that is about all they can do, it's hard to imagine what the big deal is.



edit on 28-10-2012 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by ohioriver

Originally posted by TheComte
I don't see what the problem is.

As Republicans/Conservatives are so often fond of saying when they want to spy on you, "If you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear."


The problem is that you are lazy. Yes I said lazy. You and everyone else that thinks its ok for the UN to do your job. Yes thats right. YOUR JOB. I assume you can read as you have posted on this board. Now go read your states voting laws. YOU are the election monitor. If you see any election laws being broken, march your but up to whoever is in charge at your polling place and tell them what law is being broken and demand they do something about it. It works! I did it myself last election. Someone was campaigning to close to the building and when I did MY JOB they were asked to leave.


Condescending much? I can read, and spell. And you are a clown. Yes, I said clown.

Right wingers want to spy on everyone 24/7, but as soon as anyone wants to scrutinize what they do, they cry and whine. Fact is, the right wing have turned election fraud into an art, and they need to be watched. Joe blow on the street can't do it. So, quit whining. You're part of the problem.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join