Friday, February 15, 2008

Obama's Bill: Fighting Global Poverty or a Step Closer to a New World Order?

Yesterday, I wrote about Barach Obama saying that if we want to change health care we need to change Washington. I agreed totally and said that we need to start with Congress. Today, I have even more reason to call for such action. From the bill that Senator Obama is sponsoring in the Senate, perhaps he is one of the first ones who needs to be replaced, certainly not elevated to leader of this country.

It seems that Senator Obama is sponsoring a nice-sounding bill called the "Global Poverty Act" that is up for a Senate vote on Thursday and could result in the imposition of a global tax on the United States. The bill, which has the support of many liberal religious groups, makes levels of U.S. foreign aid spending subservient to the dictates of the United Nations.

There were people recently who were questioning Hillary Clinton’s ambition to move the U.S. closer to becoming part of the New World Order. Obama seems intent on such by sponsoring a bill that would make the
U.S. subservient to the UN.

Some will say that we need to be involved in foreign aid, supposedly to wipe out global poverty, but too many forget that the U.S. is the most generous country in the world in this facet. The legislation would commit the
U.S. to spending 0.7 percent of gross national product on foreign aid, which amounts to a whopping 13-year total of $845 billion over and above what the U.S. already spends.

But hold on before I am accused of being callous and Scrooge-like toward the poor in the world. I am not, but I am against anything that puts any part of this country under the auspices of the UN or any another foreign power. This bill goes farther than just global poverty, but the Senate is rushing to get it passed without making the American people aware of all that it does contain. The House did the same thing just recently, and most of those members had not even read the entire bill before passing the House version. The Senate is hoping to do the same with their version, which is basically a carbon copy.

Here is what else this bill contains that very few know about, and it seems its sponsors do not want you to be aware of: "The declaration commits nations to banning 'small arms and light weapons' and ratifying a series of treaties, including the International Criminal Court Treaty, the Kyoto Protocol (global warming treaty), the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child."

SAY WHAT?! Banning of small arms and light weapons? Not a good thing, I would say! That would virtually disarm the U.S. and make us a subservient state of the UN.

If you were not aware of this situation, then I am glad that I could make you aware. If you were aware and have not written, e-mailed, and called your Senator to vote NO against this step toward the destruction of the sovereignty of the U.S., then I would ask, "Why not?"

Now to the point. Why would a man who claims that he wants to lead this country to a better way of life than we have now sponsor or even take part in authoring such a bill that will certainly not make this country anything but a slave to the UN? Are there any suggestions out there?

It’s time to let all your friends know and help stop this bill, the "Global Poverty Act” (S.2433). It is also time to question if this man, Senator Barack Obama, is the type of individual we want leading this country.

My question would be, "Where is he leading us?" What say you?

For the full story I am providing a link from the National Ledger:


Anonymous said...

Not sure what you're getting at here. According to the record this bill got wide support from a number of people including Republicans.

As for New World Order, what would you call the Neo-conservatives attempts at spreading democracy?

"New World Order

According to conspiracy theorists, the New World Order, or Illuminati, is a group that has been manipulating world events for hundreds of years.

The Bavarian Illuminati was founded by Adam Weisshaupt in 1776, with the aim of world domination. Today theorists would have us believe that the New World Order is made up of world leaders, religious figures, business moguls, financiers and celebrities from all over the globe.

Apparently, the Order’s aims include uniting the world under one government, reducing the population by two thirds and downscaling industrial technology to reduce pollution.

Sceptics would argue, however, that the New World Order isn’t a possibility because every government has its own interests at heart and are too selfish to organise a single group to control all nations."

Ticker said...

Thomas, if you read the entire article you will see why so many HOUSE Republican's voted for the bill. According to the article the bill was pushed through so rapidly that very few in the House even knew what it contained. It was passed on a voice vote which is a sneaky way, as you perhaps are aware of , in getting questionable bills passed. I am not sure that it would have passed has the House members read the fell bill and understood that passage of such a bill is just another step in whittling away at the soverignty of this country. The NWO as described in your post is somewhat different than the one where I see the NWO as being one controlled by an organization such as the UN.

Ticker said...

Thomas here is the quote from the article linked:

"The House version (H.R. 1302), sponsored by Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), had only 84 co-sponsors before it was suddenly brought up on the House floor last September 25 and was passed by voice vote. House Republicans were caught off-guard, unaware that the pro-U.N. measure committed the U.S. to spending hundreds of billions of dollars."

Anthony said...

Hi Ticker,

I replied to your comment on this subject over at Ed Cone's blog.

I also wrote a full post about it over at my blog.

In short, the answer to the question in your post title is definitely not "A step closer to a New World Order". Kincaid is misleading you, for some reason.