In response to President Trump’s decision to move the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem, the U.N. voted to negate that decision.
The meaningless vote didn’t serve them well. Trump followed through with his, and Amb. Nikki Haley’s, earlier statements about cutting funding from the corrupt and biased world body.
“We will no longer let the generosity of the American people be taken advantage of,” the US ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, said, adding that the “inefficiency and overspending” of the organization was well-known.
This time by $285 million. That amounts to 23.75% of our operating cost contribution ($1.2 B), not counting the cost of peacekeeping operations.
It’s a good start.
On another note, look how ABC uses this picture in their story on the same subject.
It’s long past time for the country to break from the United Nations. Their performance and history has proven to be out of sync with the intent of its formation.
In that light, I’m please to share with you the thoughts of our new Dist 1 representative Matt Gaetz (R-FL). From his newsletter . . .
Withdraw from the UN
It is past time to get the U.S. out of the U.N. – and to get the U.N. out of the U.S. This week I joined Rep. Mike Rogers (R-AL) in proposing legislation to do just that. The U.N. has become an anti-US, anti-Israel organization. It cannot be trusted to inspire nations to peace or prosperity. I continue to support a restored American presence in the world through direct action and direct coalition building, led by our new president.
A U.N. (Useless Nations) tribunal has ruled in favor of the Philippines in a case against Chinese claims to rights in the South China Sea. The Permanent Court of Arbitration said there was no evidence that China had historically exercised exclusive control over the waters or resources. And, true to form, China called the ruling “ill-founded” and says it will not be bound by it. See that middle finger?
As foreign relations and global security goes, where is President Obama on the stealing of the South China Sea by China? It’s a rhetorical question. He’s at the same place he was when Russia stole Crimea from Ukraine.
Looking back, the U.N. Permanent Court of Arbitration ruling from The Hague against China may become the most discernible symbol of the failure of President Barack Obama’s foreign policy. The U.N. ruled. China ignored. It is a pattern that leads to a weaker America, which is a feature, not a bug, of Obama’s foreign policy.
Because this move by China will have a major impact on the entire region, trade routes, air space, and common defense, this should be big news. China is claiming all the surface and air space as their own, including lands owned by other countries in and around the South China Sea. And hardly a peep out of the media about it.
The shootings in Dallas and elsewhere consume all the media. To the exclusion of that, and to the exclusion of Hillary Clinton’s illegal activities surrounding her email handling. How lucky for them is that?
After hearing the cacophony of Democrats in Washington over the Benghazi hearings, starring the person in charge, Sec. of State Hillary Clinton, a few facts are clear.
Setting the stage to not ignore history, the attack on the Consulate that ended in the deaths of our Ambassador and three other Americans, happened two months before the 2012 Presidential election.
Security conditions in Benghazi had been getting worse to the extent that the U.N. and other countries had left their Consulates because of it. The U.S.. Consulate was the only one that remained.
During that summer, the same U.S. Consulate was attacked. Also during the months preceding the September 11, 2012 attack, Ambassador Stevens had requested better security because of the escalation of terrorist attacks in Benghazi. The Arab Spring quickly turned into the Arab Winter.
Also during this same time, President Obama’s re-election campaign was in operation. During this time, President Obama was telling us that al-Qaeda was on the run. Remember VP Biden’s line? “Bin Laden is dead, GM is alive.” The meme, as echoed by the media, was that terrorism was in decline. When the truth was the opposite. They were on the run alright, but not from us, to us.
Today’s hearing revealed that Sec. Clinton knew on the night of the attack that it had nothing to do with a video. She said as much to the newly elected president of Egypt, Muslim Brotherhood leader Mohammed Morsi, the day after the attack. After all, through her Deputy Chief of Staff, Huma Abedin Weiner, the nearly familial relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood was there, for all to ignore.
Of 63 leaders who make up the Muslim Sisterhood – which is essentially nothing more than the female version of the Brotherhood – we learned that Huma’s mother, Saleha, was one of those leaders. Little attention has been paid to the other 62 leaders, however. One of them is Najla Ali Mahmoud, the wife of Mursi. Both are members of the Guidance Bureau, which proves fallacious, the claim that Najla is just an innocent and naïve spouse.
After the attack, what flows from the Obama administration and his State Department, is the lie about how the attack was attributed to a “disgusting video.” The lie was perpetuated at the United Nations, and continued through the election. With the help of the Obamamedia, nothing stuck to the two people responsible. Barack Obama, and Hillary Clinton. The two of them went so far as to make a video of their own to perpetuate the lie broadcast to people in Pakistan.
The other thing that is clear is how right Elijah Cummings, D-MD, was when he said this hearing is political. That’s because the lies about the event under investigation were blatantly political. Which was, to keep the truth of his and Sec. Clinton’s agenda and campaign of deceit from the American people until at least after the election. Where four Americans under her purview were left with no protection and no rescue attempts made. After all, to quote Mrs. Clinton, “It is a subject that we are absolutely required to explore.”
Obama and Clinton lied. And four Americans died. And the lie lasted well past the November election. You bet it’s political, on their part. To save his re-election in 2012 and her election in 2016.
While the media is preoccupied with changing history where the Iraq war is concerned, and, trying to blame G.W. Bush for the rise of ISIS instead of Obama, for losing everything the U.S. won under Bush, here’s a little refresher from ten years ago.
Saddam Hussein’s Defiance of United Nations Resolutions
Saddam Hussein’s Development of Weapons of Mass Destruction
Saddam Hussein’s Repression of the Iraqi People
Saddam Hussein’s Support for International Terrorism
Saddam Hussein’s Refusal to Account for Gulf War Prisoners
Saddam Hussein’s Refusal to Return Stolen Property
Saddam Hussein’s Efforts to Circumvent Economic Sanctions
Also note that all the links in that post, the transcript, the audio, and the video of Bush making his case to the United Nations were to The White House website. After Obama took office, all those links to what happened in “our house” were scrubbed.
Here is a link to the transcript, where you can see for yourself, all seven reasons for going into Iraq. It was not, as the meme today portends, just WMDs. Also, know that Democrats voted to approve going into Iraq too. As did the United Nations.
That President Obama lost the war that Bush won should come as no surprise. But you won’t hear that in today’s mainstream media. The meme today is, what else? Blame Bush.
It must be blatantly obvious to everyone, media excepted, that the Obama administration’s determination for an Iranian nuclear “deal” has nothing to do with whether it is a good deal.
Latest development, and this has to have the Iranian negotiators laughing themselves silly (oh, and our allies concerned) over the smoke and mirrors the administration is showing the American people by pretending that their negotiations are about to come to a fruitful end.
U.S. negotiators are said to have given up ground on demands that Iran be forced to disclose the full range of its nuclear activities at the outset of a nuclear deal, a concession experts say would gut the verification the Obama administration has vowed would stand as the crux of a deal with Iran.
This, after learning a few weeks ago about the existence of a covert underground and fortified nuclear enrichment site. Instead of walking away from talks with a dishonest and belligerent state, they continue to forge ahead with a “deal” that only insures nuclear proliferation in the one country responsible for supporting more terrorist attacks and organizations than any other in the world.
You have to question, who’s side is President Obama on?
For years, most people have assumed that Israel has nuclear weapons or nuclear weapon capability. But neither Israel nor the United States have ever publicly confirmed it. Until now. The Obama administration has declassified, and published, documents going back to the 1980’s that confirm the existence of nuclear weapons capability in Israel.
Why would Obama do that? Two reasons, one of which I mentioned in this post . . .
Imagine watching your enemy and seeing your so-called ally meet up to strike a deal that threatens your very existence. It’s no wonder Netanyahu did what he did. That isn’t showing disrespect for The One. That is sticking up for his country and exposing Obama for the fool in international relations that he is. That’s why he is so upset. And that’s why you can expect the petulant child to double-down and make the world less safe for our best ally in the Middle East, Israel, faster.
The other reason is to excuse Iran for wanting to have a nuclear weapons program, that they already (illegally) have. Now, with the help of our own president, Iran can say, “Israel has one, we feel threatened, so we must have one too.” “To maintain stability” they will argue. And Obama will say, yes, that seems reasonable. (Ignoring Iran’s continual call for the elimination of Israel.) It makes John Kerry’s job so much easier by letting Iran have the nukes they want.
And Obama’s legacy will be marred by mushroom clouds. God help us all.
For more than four decades, Americans have waited for “peace in the Middle East.” The reason they’ve expected peace in the Middle East is because the U.N., politicians in Washington, and the media have us all believing that there actually is a peace process going on. The unrest has been ongoing since the formation of Israel in 1947.
The truth of the matter is, and President Clinton proved the point, that the Islamist half of this phony peace process have more to gain by clubbing Israel from “the process” than they do in having peace. Peace that the Islamists do not want. They want peace without Israel.
In negotiations with Yasir Arafat, the chairman of the P.L.O, Clinton essentially called Arafat’s bluff. Clinton agreed to everything that he asked for. Instead of coming to an agreement and having peace, Arafat walked away and refused to agree to his own demands for peace with Israel.
The controlling political authority in the conflict, Hamas, still has the destruction and elimination of Israel in their charter. There is no way to negotiate that. That is why Netanyahu was right when he said there never would be a so-called two-state solution. Because the Palestinian side is the side that is demanding a one-state solution.
Netanyahu’s clarification was simply to say that he would be for a two-state solution if they had a negotiating partner, including Iran who supports and finances Hamas, that also wanted a two-state solution. But they don’t. And President Obama has his head up his ass if he thinks peace can be achieved by negotiations when the Islamist side denies Israel’s right to exist. The media is just as irresponsible for giving the president a pass by keeping this story from being told.
The existence of Israel is not negotiable. The reason it is “hard to find a path” toward serious negotiations is not because of the lack of will from Israel. It is because of the lack of will on the part of the Palestinians and their shadow government (Iran) to recognize Israel as a legitimate State. And because of the naïveté of President Obama to pretend that they do.
Too bad President Obama doesn’t have what it takes to come to terms with that very basic fact. He is the one missing the opportunity to bring the parties together. And paling up with the enemy while chastising our ally, Israel, is not even “looking” for a path to realistic peace talks, let alone finding one. And until he does, there will never be peace, and always be a “process.”
According to the United Nations (aka Useless Nations), the end is near, it’s our fault, and we’re all going to die. Well, only one thing there is certain.
From the AP:
Climate change is happening, it’s almost entirely man’s fault and limiting its impacts may require reducing greenhouse gas emissions to zero this century, the U.N.’s panel on climate science said Sunday.
Here’s the plan.
Everyone who has anything to do with the United Nations and the IPCC must not exhale for the next 24 hours.
Continue to monitor the weather and take up the matter again in 2214.
Was checking in to one of my favorite liberal, progressive, downright wacko websites, the Ring of Fire1, to see what they had to say about the IPCC (International Panel on Climate Change) report on climate change. Who according to them, is the world’s authority on the greenhouse effect.
I previewed the report in a comment on one of their posts a few days before its release. Where their scientists had to admit that there has been no global warming in the last seventeen years.
Harken back to 2007 when the global warming nuts were saying that the arctic ice would be gone by 2013. When in fact the arctic ice grew by 29%, over a half million square miles, in the last year.
But alas, not only is my comment gone, but all comments are gone (not that they had very many in the first place). In fact, they have disabled comments altogether. So now, the Ring of Fire has been reduced to a blow torch. No ring, no two-way. Like Obama himself, no negotiations. Just fun food for their lemmings.
On slow news days, the big lawyers post about big lawsuits against big pharma, big energy, and whoever else has big, deep pockets.
1 The Ring of Fire is a Liberal (they’ll say Progressive) talk radio show, co-hosted by Attorneys Mike Papantonio and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and another lib named Sam Seder. The Ring of Fire is unique in terms of a talk radio show in that they don’t take calls live. Like Obama, they screen all questions emailed to them or left on their answering machine. Lord only knows what happens after that. Their show is scripted to pump out whatever liberal blather is on their page, regardless of what is going on in the news of the day. They really have a mis-named show. Not unlike Obamacare being called affordable. There is no ‘ring’ left in the Ring of Fire. They are unique in another way too, compared to ‘America’s Anchorman.’ They are not supported by advertisers. They don’t have a product anyone but other law firms want to be associated with. If they were ‘supported’ by advertisers, their show would have died when Air America Radio died, when its founder and Papantonio grew tired of personally footing the bill.
Great Britain’s Prime Minister David Cameron called a special session of Britain’s Parliament to discuss growing tensions in Sirya and President Obama’s call for military action over the use of chemical weapons, ostensibly used by the Syrian regime on its own people.
U.S. Congress On Vacation
President Obama, on the other hand, demonstrating his lack of leadership in not calling Congress back from vacation for a special session, is now talking about going it alone. Without a coalition of willing partners and without involving Congress. And so far, without addressing the American people as to what our security interests in Syria are that justifies us getting involved militarily on our own. And also without explaining to the American people the possible consequences of a slap-in-the-face cruise missile attack.
A proposed attack with the potential targets being revealed to the world, including the Assad regime. A military strategist, he is not. Nor, apparently, are the people advising him.
It is this lack of leadership and President Obama’s vague, if not non-existent, strategy in the end-game with Syria that has caused all the coalition partners he had last week to drop out. Add NATO to the list of the unwilling. Instead of following the blind, they’ve taken the position to wait and see what the U.N. inspectors conclude about who it was that used the WMD’s outside of Damascus. So far, most people in the U.S. aren’t convinced that we are being threatened by Syria to the extent that we need to act unilaterally against them, not only at the expense of our credibility in the world, but at the expense of our ally Israel, who both Iran and Syria said will attack if the U.S. attacks Syria. And certainly not before knowing who will be taking over in Syria. Common thought now is if Assad goes down, alQaeda and company takes his place.
We’ve already seen it happen in Libya with alQaeda and their affiliates, and in Egypt with the Muslim Brotherhood. Is Obama’s ego worth turning over the rest of the middle east to radical Islam and possibly sacrificing the state of Israel?
The time to act militarily has long past. We’re not the world’s policeman and civil-war-country custodian. They’ll have to fight it out on their own, and kill each other until someone wins. Then, and only then, will we know who it is we’re dealing with.
Was checking in to one of my favorite liberal, progressive, downright wacko websites, the 
