PDA

View Full Version : Int'l Issues Obama, UN, Global taxes


HonestChieffan
03-28-2009, 12:32 PM
With what we already know about the administration, this becomes more frightening. Obama has made clear he supports a UN tax on GNP to give away to whomever the UN wants to. With that known, add to it the administration use of global warming as a cloak to shut down domestic oil exploration and natural gas development to force the switch to unknown and so fart theroretical energy research. Then their desire to jion hands over any global warming mandates like the Kyoto treaty. Now with the upcoming global warming gathering of kooks in Copenhagen, we see this as a prelude.

http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2009/03/27/sheppard_global_warming_un/

The UN Makes it Official: Global Warming Hysteria Is All About Redistributing Wealth
By Noel Sheppard
Associate Editor, Newsbusters.org

For years, climate realists around the world have been warning the international community that the entire man-made global warming myth and resulting hysteria is all a scheme to redistribute wealth under the pretense of saving the planet.

In a document obtained by FOX News, the United Nations has made it official.

As FOX News executive editor George Russell reported Friday:

A United Nations document on “climate change” that will be distributed to a major environmental conclave next week envisions a huge reordering of the world economy, likely involving trillions of dollars in wealth transfer, millions of job losses and gains, new taxes, industrial relocations, new tariffs and subsidies, and complicated payments for greenhouse gas abatement schemes and carbon taxes — all under the supervision of the world body.

Those and other results are blandly discussed in a discretely worded United Nations “information note” on potential consequences of the measures that industrialized countries will likely have to take to implement the Copenhagen Accord, the successor to the Kyoto Treaty, after it is negotiated and signed by December 2009. […]


The 16-page note, obtained by FOX News, will be distributed to participants at a mammoth negotiating session that starts on March 29 in Bonn, Germany, the first of three sessions intended to hammer out the actual commitments involved in the new deal.

Some of the ideas discussed in this document eerily resembled what NASA’s James Hansen wrote to Barack Obama last December:

A rising carbon price is essential to “decarbonize” the economy, i.e., to move the nation toward the era beyond fossil fuels. The most effective way to achieve this is a carbon tax (on oil, gas, and coal) at the well-head or port of entry. The tax will then appropriately affect all products and activities that use fossil fuels. The public’s near-term, mid-term, and long-term lifestyle choices will be affected by knowledge that the carbon tax rate will be rising.

The public will support the tax if it is returned to them, equal shares on a per capita basis (half shares for children up to a maximum of two child-shares per family), deposited monthly in bank accounts. No large bureaucracy is needed. A person reducing his carbon footprint more than average makes money. A person with large cars and a big house will pay a tax much higher than the dividend.

Maybe more concerning, Obama’s 2010 budget proposal includes a carbon cap-and-trade scheme, although there is some question as to whether this will survive the coming battle on Capitol Hill. ABC’s George Stephanopoulos reported last Friday that cap-and-trade will likely be sacrificed this year as Obama and Congressional Democrats focus attention on health care.

Beyond this, recent polls have revealed an increasing skepticism by the public concerning the veracity of media reports regarding global warming. These same polls also find that the appetite for expensive solutions during a recession is waning.

Add to this the recent findings which suggest the current cooling trend that began in 1998 could last for at least another decade; the folks looking to use this manufactured crisis as a means of redistributing wealth must be realizing that the window of opportunity is starting to close.

As such, they may believe this upcoming December meeting in Copenhagen is their last chance, thereby making this 16-page document a formal game plan for what is likely the beginning of a nine month full-court press.

Let’s be honest, folks like Nobel laureate Al Gore have their reputations and their very fortunes on the line here, so we should all expect a great deal of hysterical media coverage in the near future — especially after the hurricane season begins in May.

Here’s my advice, America: Prepare now for the coming storm.

Noel Sheppard is associate editor of the Media Research Center’s NewsBusters.org. He welcomes feedback at nsheppard@newbusters.org.

banyon
03-28-2009, 12:38 PM
Obama has made clear he supports a UN tax on GNP to give away to whomever the UN wants to.

When did he "make that clear"?

HonestChieffan
03-28-2009, 12:40 PM
When he sponsored the bill.

banyon
03-28-2009, 12:43 PM
When he sponsored the bill.

What bill?

HonestChieffan
03-28-2009, 12:51 PM
The same one that has been discussed and pointed out to you before that you continue to deny it exists. At least you are consistant.

banyon
03-28-2009, 02:38 PM
The same one that has been discussed and pointed out to you before that you continue to deny it exists. At least you are consistant.

Are you referring to this thread (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=188850&highlight=global) where I put a clown suit on you and you couldn't find any language in the bill you were talking about that supported your claim whatsoever?

HonestChieffan
03-28-2009, 03:01 PM
Widely reported and well known proposal that only you fail to recognize or understand....

Barack Obama's Global Tax Proposal Up for Senate Vote


By Cliff Kincaid
Feb 12, 2008


A nice-sounding bill called the "Global Poverty Act," sponsored by Democratic presidential candidate and Senator Barack Obama, 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.

Barack Obama's Global Tax Proposal Up for Senate Vote

Senator Joe Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has not endorsed either Senator Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton in the presidential race. But on Thursday, February 14, he is trying to rush Obama’s “Global Poverty Act” (S.2433) through his committee. The legislation would commit the U.S. to spending 0.7 percent of gross national product on foreign aid, which amounts to a phenomenal 13-year total of $845 billion over and above what the U.S. already spends.

The bill, which is item number four on the committee’s business meeting agenda, passed the House by a voice vote last year because most members didn’t realize what was in it. Congressional sponsors have been careful not to calculate the amount of foreign aid spending that it would require. According to the website of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, no hearings have been held on the Obama bill in that body.

A release from the Obama Senate office about the bill declares, “In 2000, the U.S. joined more than 180 countries at the United Nations Millennium Summit and vowed to reduce global poverty by 2015. We are halfway towards this deadline, and it is time the United States makes it a priority of our foreign policy to meet this goal and help those who are struggling day to day.”

The legislation itself requires the President “to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day.”

The bill defines the term “Millennium Development Goals” as the goals set out in the United Nations Millennium Declaration, General Assembly Resolution 55/2 (2000).

The U.N. says that “The commitment to provide 0.7% of gross national product (GNP) as official development assistance was first made 35 years ago in a General Assembly resolution, but it has been reaffirmed repeatedly over the years, including at the 2002 global Financing for Development conference in Monterrey, Mexico. However, in 2004, total aid from the industrialized countries totaled just $78.6 billion—or about 0.25% of their collective GNP.”

In addition to seeking to eradicate poverty, that 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.

The Millennium Declaration also affirms the U.N. as “the indispensable common house of the entire human family, through which we will seek to realize our universal aspirations for peace, cooperation and development.”

Jeffrey Sachs, who runs the U.N.’s “Millennium Project,” says that the U.N. plan to force the U.S. to pay 0.7 percent of GNP in increased foreign aid spending would add $65 billion a year to what the U.S. already spends. Over a 13-year period, from 2002, when the U.N.’s Financing for Development conference was held, to the target year of 2015, when the U.S. is expected to meet the “Millennium Development Goals,” this amounts to $845 billion. And the only way to raise that kind of money, Sachs has written, is through a global tax, preferably on carbon-emitting fossil fuels.

Obama’s bill has only six co-sponsors. They are Senators Maria Cantwell, Dianne Feinstein, Richard Lugar, Richard Durbin, Chuck Hagel and Robert Menendez. But it appears that Biden and Obama see passage of this bill as a way to highlight Democratic Party priorities in the Senate.

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.

It appears the Senate version is being pushed not only by Biden and Obama, a member of the committee, but Lugar, the ranking Republican member. Lugar has worked with Obama in the past to promote more foreign aid for Russia, supposedly to stem nuclear proliferation, and has become Obama’s mentor. Like Biden, Lugar is a globalist. They have both promoted passage of the U.N.’s Law of the Sea Treaty, for example.

The so-called “Lugar-Obama initiative” was modeled after the Nunn-Lugar program, also known as the Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) program, which was designed to eliminate weapons of mass destruction in the former Soviet Union. But one defense analyst, Rich Kelly, noted evidence that “CTR funds have eased the Russian military’s budgetary woes, freeing resources for such initiatives as the war in Chechnya and defense modernization.” He recommended that Congress “eliminate CTR funding so that it does not finance additional, perhaps more threatening, programs in the former Soviet Union.” However, over $6 billion has already been spent on the program.

Another program modeled on Nunn-Lugar, the Initiatives for Proliferation Prevention (IPP), was recently exposed as having funded nuclear projects in Iran through Russia.

More foreign aid through passage of the Global Poverty Act was identified as one of the strategic goals of InterAction, the alliance of U.S-based international non-governmental organizations that lobbies for more foreign aid. The group is heavily financed by the U.S. Government, having received $1.4 million from taxpayers in fiscal year 2005 and $1.7 million in 2006. However, InterAction recently issued a report accusing the United States of “falling short on its commitment to rid the world of dire poverty by 2015 under the U.N. Millennium Development Goals…”

It’s not clear what President Bush would do if the bill passes the Senate. The bill itself quotes Bush as declaring that “We fight against poverty because opportunity is a fundamental right to human dignity.” Bush’s former top aide, Michael J. Gerson, writes in his new book, Heroic Conservatism, that Bush should be remembered as the President who “sponsored the largest percentage increases in foreign assistance since the Marshall Plan…”

Even these increases, however, will not be enough to satisfy the requirements of the Obama bill. A global tax will clearly be necessary to force American taxpayers to provide the money.

* Americans who would like their senators to know what they are voting on can contact them through information at the official Senate site.

Cliff Kincaid is the Editor of Accuracy in Media.




Then there are these as well for you to deny any accuracy...

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=56405
http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obamas-global-tax-proposal-up-for-senate-vote/
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=56405

Or this?
http://think.mtv.com/044FDFFFF00E176D300080098F2B2/User/Blog/BlogPostDetail.aspx

Obama Backs U.N. Bill to Disarm Americans
Posted May 07, 2008 at 10:07 PM

Obama Backs U.N. Bill to Disarm Americans


Four Winds 10
May 7, 2008



This is just in from Sen. Coburn’s office. Obama has authored a bill, and it is now in the Senate, to give the UN .7% of our GNP to be used to feed hungry 3rd worlders, AND to use UN force to disarm you and me and all gun owners. No one in the media has brought this to the attention of the general sheeple out here.

Monday, May 05, 2008 12:48 PM
Subject: RE: Obama’s bill S2433 passed the committee and going to the Senate

Sent:

Senator Coburn is blocking this bill.



Patrick Guinn

Obama’s bill S2433 would require the U.S. to initially direct .7 percent of our GNP into the United Nations coffers for distribution as they see fit, for "food" to third world nations. Under earlier agreements this would evolve into a national tax on the U.S. with the UN attempting to levy this on all first world nations.



The U.N. would have the power to increase this rate of taxation.



The U.S. would be required to surrender some of its sovereignty over foreign aid by putting it under UN control. The bill would force the U.S. to sign onto the U.N.’s Millennium Declaration, which would commit us not only to "banning small arms and light weapons" but also to adhere to the International Criminal Court Treaty and the Kyoto Protocol.



http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_2433.html



Detailed Summary

Global Poverty Act of 2007 - Directs the President, through the Secretary of State, to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the U.S. foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the United Nations Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day.



Requires the strategy to contain specific and measurable goals and to consist of specified components, including: (1) continued investment or involvement in existing U.S. initiatives related to international poverty reduction and trade preference programs for developing countries; (2) improving the effectiveness of development assistance and making available additional overall United States assistance levels as appropriate; (3) enhancing and expanding debt relief as appropriate; (4) mobilizing and leveraging the participation of businesses and public-private partnerships; (5) coordinating the goal of poverty reduction with other internationally recognized Millennium Development Goals; and (6) integrating principles of sustainable development and entrepreneurship into policies and programs.



Sets forth specified reporting requirements. Directs the Secretary of State to designate a coordinator who will have primary responsibility for overseeing and drafting the reports, as well as responsibility for helping to implement recommendations contained in the reports.<br>

Defines specified terms.



Status of the Legislation

Latest Major Action: 4/24/2008: Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 718.



http://kilosparksitup.blogspot.com/2008/02/more-on-barack-obama-s2433-global.html



More on Barack Obama’s S.2433 : Global Poverty Act

We know for a fact that this bill will cost America $845 billion above and beyond what America already spends on global aid in the next thirteen years. America will be locked in to giving .7 percent of the U.S. gross national product. That in itself is scary enough, but there is way more to Obama’s bill. It also locks us into United Nations Millennium Summit. Cliff Kincaid from Accuracy in Media is all over this bill.



He writes-(Underlined by me)

The bill institutes the United Nations Millennium Summit goals as the benchmarks for U.S. spending.

"It is time the United States makes it a priority of our foreign policy to meet this goal and help those who are struggling day to day," a statement issued by supporters, including Obama, said.

Specifically, it would "declare" that the official U.S. policy is to eliminate global poverty, that the president is "required" to "develop and implement" a strategy to reach that goal and requires that the U.S. efforts be "specific and measurable."



Kincaid said that after cutting through all of the honorable-sounding goals in the plan, the bottom line is that the legislation would mandate the 0.7 percent of the U.S. GNP as "official development assistance."



"In addition to seeking to eradicate poverty, that (U.N.) 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 of Biological Diversity, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women and the Convention of the Rights of the Child," he said.



Those U.N. protocols would make U.S. law on issues ranging from the 2nd Amendment to energy usage and parental rights all subservient to United Nations whims.



Kincaid also reported Jeffrey Sachs, who runs the "Millennium Project," confirms a U.N. plan to force the U.S. to pay 0.7 percent of GNP would add about $65 billion a year to what the U.S. already donates overseas.



And the only way to raise that funding, Sachs confirms, "is through a global tax, preferably on carbon-emitting fossil fuels," Kincaid writes.



On the forum run by Americans for Legal Immigration PAC, one writer reported estimates of taxes from 35 cents to $1 dollar a gallon on gasoline would be needed.(LINK)



This ladies and gentleman is the Barack Obama vision for America . WND called Obama’s office and the others who support this bill….No comments.



See Obama’s Global Tax Bill (S.2433)


But then I am sure these folks are all in error. They really need to call you.

banyon
03-28-2009, 03:10 PM
So, are you going to go through two threads cutting and pasting your way to avoiding the simple question I asked in the other thread?

WHERE IS THE LANGUAGE IN THE BILL THAT SETS A TAX ON GNP?

HonestChieffan
03-28-2009, 03:14 PM
Well you have never had any interest in this enough to read what the millenium project is so why would you now?

Its ok, you dont have to understand it to disagree with it. Just keep on your merry way. Its not expected that you would try to understand an issue before you take a position so thers no pressure to do so now.

Everyone but you is wrong.

BucEyedPea
03-28-2009, 03:33 PM
watermelons

HonestChieffan
03-28-2009, 03:39 PM
to early. Watermelons are a July thing

BucEyedPea
03-28-2009, 03:45 PM
No the commies went into the enviro movement....so they're green on the outside red on the inside. This is just totalitarian.

HonestChieffan
03-28-2009, 03:48 PM
Banyon says its all made up. So relax, its all false.

KILLER_CLOWN
03-28-2009, 04:01 PM
When is everyone going to realise that the UN is a global lovemaking organisation? They just want to love you!

banyon
03-28-2009, 04:25 PM
Well you have never had any interest in this enough to read what the millenium project is so why would you now?

Its ok, you dont have to understand it to disagree with it. Just keep on your merry way. Its not expected that you would try to understand an issue before you take a position so thers no pressure to do so now.

Everyone but you is wrong.

Sure I did. I read the bill. You didn't. It didn't say what you claimed. Until you cite the language in the bill, it still don't be there, no matter how futilly or furiously you cut and paste from another drudge-clone website. You took your trusted right-wing propaganda source as gospel and it wasn't and now you want to try to save face.

It's really quite simple to answer the question if you've read the bill isn't it?

Just to remind you in case you forgot the question again:

WHERE IS THE LANGUAGE IN THE BILL THAT SETS A TAX ON GNP?

HonestChieffan
03-28-2009, 04:30 PM
Oh come on, your ability to demostrate "mental block" is boundless. Maybe you need to go to the mall and say hi to some spanish speaking people. That would open your mind even further. Oh wait....

Do you have a mall in Dodge?

banyon
03-28-2009, 04:42 PM
Oh come on, your ability to demostrate "mental block" is boundless. Maybe you need to go to the mall and say hi to some spanish speaking people. That would open your mind even further. Oh wait....

Do you have a mall in Dodge?

WHERE IS THE LANGUAGE IN THE BILL SETTING A TAX ON GNP?

BucEyedPea
03-28-2009, 04:48 PM
Oh come on, your ability to demostrate "mental block" is boundless. Maybe you need to go to the mall and say hi to some spanish speaking people. That would open your mind even further. Oh wait....

Do you have a mall in Dodge?

Then he could see that the malls do have shoppers in them.

banyon
03-28-2009, 04:59 PM
Then he could see that the malls do have shoppers in them.

Yet I probably wouldn't crazily extrapolate that experience into some sort of unfounded macroeconomic conclusion.

Calcountry
03-28-2009, 05:06 PM
watermelonsIn Watermelon sugar by Richard Brautigan.

Calcountry
03-28-2009, 05:09 PM
When is everyone going to realise that the UN is a global lovemaking organisation? They just want to love you!They are like that Simpson's episode, where Al Davis comes wandering out of the woods, all aglow with nuclear radiation saying, "I bring you love".

HonestChieffan
03-28-2009, 06:10 PM
Then he could see that the malls do have shoppers in them.

No those are Mexicans, not shoppers. Its selective liberalism.

Redrum_69
03-28-2009, 06:15 PM
This is all Bush and the Skull and Bones fault!

banyon
03-28-2009, 06:32 PM
No those are Mexicans, not shoppers. Its selective liberalism.

Hey did you ever figure out where the bill talked about that tax rate?