The Democrats utilize the concept of PROJECTION constantly. When they tell lies, they brazenly project the blame on others, usually MAGA Conservatives, for doing precisely what it is they are doing. When Tucker Carlson of Fox News started showing here-to-for unseen...
In Trump’s Second Term – Get America out of the United Nations Entirely!
Speaking at The Heartland Institute’s Madrid climate conference on December 3, Dr. William Happer, a former science advisor to the president said, “By far the most important thing that Mr. Trump did concerning climate change was to withdraw from the Paris Agreement. That was not an easy decision because a good fraction of his own supporters, his own party, were begging him to remain in the treaty.”
Happer is right. It took great courage for the president to announce that the U.S. would get out of Paris this year, the very first opportunity to do so. And it was indeed the right thing to do. Besides its nonsensical objective of limiting ‘Earth’s temperature’ rise as if we had a global thermostat, the agreement lets developing countries largely off the hook. This despite the fact that non-OECD countries are now the greatest source of energy-related carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions.
But it is not enough. If Trump wins another term, he should get out of the treaty that underlies the Paris Agreement and all the others like it. This would be highly flawed 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Trump could work to get the U.S. out of, or disregard, each of the UNFCCC-based agreements one by one. But this would result in years of conflict. It is far better to be done with the hugely expensive and unscientific UNFCCC climate fiasco once and for all. Joe Bast, former president and CEO of Heartland (now a Senior Fellow at Heartland), a national non-profit research center based in Arlington Heights, Ill., summed up the situation well: “This really is a case where cutting the tail off the dog all at once, rather than an inch at a time, is the right move. It would be the shot heard around the world and bring the whole man-made global warming house of cards tumbling down.”
Bast is also right. But there is an even bigger fish to fry in a second term of a Trump administration – get America out of the United Nations entirely.
So many Americans, particularly those in politics, have been brainwashed into thinking the U.N. constitutes something beneficial to the United States. It is not. Nevertheless, we’re not sure that even Trump can extricate us the way he got us out of Paris and the Iran nuclear deal. But it’s worth his best effort.
Most of us are aware that the members of the organization are the worst imaginable human rights offenders. They include Russia, China, North Korea and over two dozen Arab and Muslim dictatorships. Two of those nations, Russia and China, even have veto power over all U.N. activities.
The diplomats spend most of their time passing anti-Israel resolutions, trying to bully the U.S. into surrendering its sovereignty to those who desire a One World government and allowing countries like Iran and Saudi Arabia to head up the Committee on Human Rights (that is not a joke).
We all know about UN peace-keepers, but you may not know that frequently, at the first sign of danger, the guys in the baby blue helmets turn and run. Their own human rights record in Africa and Asia on peacekeeping missions is deplorable. The fact that we even pick up most of the expense to run the UN is really embarrassing. We do this while reaping no benefits from the organization whatsoever. The foreign staffs of the member countries of the U.N. have diplomatic immunity, allowing them to thumb their noses at the New York City police as they double-park all over the City.
What the U.N. most closely resembles is a bizarre comedy film of children running a school for their own benefit without adult supervision. They tend to elect people from Third World countries to act as front men and women in order to promote the illusion that even the smallest, poorest nations are the equal of the richest and most powerful. Why else would the nine U.N. Secretary Generals have come from Norway, Sweden, Burma, Austria, Peru, Egypt, Ghana, South Korea and, currently, Portugal?
The most democratic aspect of the U.N. is that the offspring of these Secretary Generals, such as Kofi Annan’s son, get to use their father’s influence to get rich in much the same way as Joe Biden’s son, Hunter, did.
When Democrats like Bernie Sanders insist that felons, including convicted terrorists, should be allowed to vote in our elections, he’s merely following the lead of the United Nations, where the worst tyrannies on earth, such as China, which sends political dissidents and members of religious minorities to concentration camps, are encouraged to condemn Israel for human rights violations.
There are 193 nations that are official members, along with two — the Catholic Church and the state of Palestine — that have observer status. When it comes to those issues that matter the most to the United States, we can only count on seven or eight votes to support our position and maybe a dozen or so abstentions from our alleged friends and allies in Europe. But that’s a lot more than Israel can ever expect.
One of the few American politicians who has voiced any interest in getting the U.S. out of the U.N. and the U.N. out of the U.S. is House member Thomas Massie (R-Kentucky) who has sponsored the American Sovereignty Restoration Act (HR 204) which he has nicknamed “Amexit” after the Brits voted for a “Brexit” from the U.N.-like EU.
Rep. Massie sums it up in this fashion: “The best thing you can say about the United Nations is it’s mostly ineffective, but I hate that we waste our hard-earned taxpayer money on it. A lot of the foreign relations bills that come before us in Congress will include lines like ‘Whereas the U.N. has said this…’ or ‘the U.N. has decided that…’ – well, that’s almost an automatic no vote for me, because why would I defer to the United Nations if we’re a sovereign country?”
Whether Trump can succeed in getting the U.S. out of the U.N. is an open question. But let’s hope the American people give him a chance to try do so with a second term.
Disclaimer: The information contained in this website is for educational, general information, and entertainment purposes only and is never intended to constitute medical or legal advice or to replace the personalized care of a primary care practitioner or legal expert.
While we endeavor to keep this information up to date and correct, the information provided by America Out Loud, its website(s), and any properties (including its radio shows and podcasts) makes no representations, or warranties of any kind, expressed, or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability, or availability with respect to its website(s) or the information, products, services or related graphics and images contained on the website(s) for any purpose.
The opinions expressed on the website(s), and the opinions expressed on the radio shows and podcasts, are the opinions of the show hosts and do not necessarily represent the opinions, beliefs, or policies of anyone or any entity we may endorse. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.
At no time, nor in any event, will we be liable for any loss, or damage, including without limitation, indirect or consequential loss of data or profits arising out of, in an association of, or connection with the use of this website.
Through this website, users can link to other websites that may be listed. Those websites are not under the control of America Out Loud or its brands. We have no control over the nature, content, or availability of those sites. America Out Loud has no control over what the sites do with the information they collect. The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation, nor does it endorse the views expressed with or by them.
Every effort is made to keep the website up and running smoothly. However, America Out Loud takes no responsibility for, nor are we, and will not be liable for being temporarily unavailable due to technical difficulties beyond our control. America Out Loud does not sell, trade, nor market email addresses or other personal data.
Dr. Jay Lehr and Mr. Tom Harris promote the Heartland Institute’s anti-United Nations political message which is unsurprising since both Mr. Harris and Dr. Lehr are Heartland associates. (Source Lehr & Harris by-line in this opinion piece)
The problem for Dr. Lehr and Mr. Harris is that they claim to be members of a non-partisan science organization. (Source International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC)) According to the the ICSC’s mission statement, “…the ICSC is a non-partisan entity that works to promote better understanding of climate science and policy worldwide.” Mr. Harris and Dr. Lehr offer political arguments but discuss no science.
If you act as a political advocate for the Heartland Institute, then your assertion that you’re non-partisan entity is a sham.
What a stupid comment from James (as usual). Promoting US withdrawal from a corrupt entity for which the US carries by far the biggest financial burden is not partisan. It is common sense.
Tom Harris has no rational argument so he falls back on insults.
Mr. Harris contends his assertion “…there is an even bigger fish to fry in a second term of a Trump administration – get America out of the United Nations entirely” is not a political partisan argument. When Dr. Jay Lehr and Mr. Harris castigate Senator Bernie Sanders for advocating convicted felons regain the right to vote after completion of their full sentence, they are making a partisan political argument which has nothing to do with climate science.
This opinion piece along with others writing by Mr. Harris and Dr. Lehr show their agenda and it is not science. For example: Dr. Jay Lehr and Mr. Tom Harris claim that GOP leaders should decide their position on climate change based on “political strategy” rather than scientific evidence.
They castigated Republicans like Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Trump appointee Neil Chatterjee, chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for accepting the scientific evidence of human-caused climate change. Dr. Lehr & Mr. Harris asserts these Republicans are “…abandoning their base and supporting the climate scare is terrible political strategy for Republicans…” (Source “Conservatives Must Stand Up to Climate Change Bullying” by Tom Harris and Dr. Jay Lehr, May 9, 2019, PJ Media)
Dave James has no rational argument so he falls back on logical fallacies. As demonstrated in his most recent post, straw man arguments seem his favourite.
Rather than dispute my arguments Mr. Tom Harris calls them “logical fallacies.” At least he has dropped the insults.
Quoting Dr. Lehr and Mr. Harris directly and providing the source so Mr. Harris’ and Dr. Lehr’s words can be read in context is not a straw-man argument but polite, direct and well-supported debate.
Dr. Lehr and Mr. Harris is that they claim to be members of a non-partisan science organization. But they spend a great deal of their time making partisan arguments and promoting coal for example:
“Trump right to try to end the WAR ON COAL” Dr. Jay Lehr & Tom Harris, Apr 16, 2019, America Out Loud,
“Time to end the war on coal” Dr. Jay Lehr & Tom Harris, May 14, 2019, Citizens Journal,
“Clean coal for the future” Tom Harris, Feb 9, 2018, Idaho Press,
“Coal key to national security strategy” Tom Harris, Jan 13, 2018, The Spectrum,
“Climate scare must be debunked for coal to recover” Tom Harris, Jan 2, 2018, Superior Telegram,
“Harris: Coal has many uses” Tom Harris, Sep 3, 2018, Casper Star Tribune
The UN, like every other human political institution is open to corruption. That does not distinguish it from any other government entity. I think, however, there is a case to be made for its abolition or removal somewhere else as follows:
1. It is not doing what it was designed to do; namely, provide a forum for discussion of world problems because technology has made the original notion of gathering together in one place obsolete. We communicate very easily with one another without any necessity of assembling a lot of people in one place. And when we do assemble people, such as in security council meetings, only very rarely is there any decision taken because the permanent members of the council have a veto and will use it. No government I am aware of pays any attention ( except when very convenient) to any vote in the General Assembly as well. In any event, the UN has no democratic legitimacy because its representatives are not elected; they are appointed by their respective governments and represent those governments. And most of the governments represented are various forms of dictatorships.
2. It has become an economic quagmire. No one knows, except the Secretary-General how the money is actually spent. There is no accountability and the spending habits of some UN agencies like UNESCO are extravagant. We need a full audit and accounting for the funds spent. In the very likely event that the Secretary-General refuses to comply, the US should cut off all funds until such time as a proper audit is completed.
3. Its employees abuse privileges: the one example mentioned is double parking. There are no doubt others. The US, as part of continuing to fund some of the operations of the UN, should make the receipt of funds conditional on the UN collecting and disbursing to New York the amounts of parking fines and other similar fines. In other words, it should make the UN responsible for policing its own personnel. If done this way, we don’t have the problem of violating the hallowed practices of diplomatic immunity.
I have never thought that the UN did anything useful, and whatever it did, it did as expensively as possible. And so I do believe we should get rid of it. There some international agencies that do relatively useful work like ICAO, ILO, WHO. These we can set up independently and fund appropriately.
maybe if you look closely at the current Libyan crisis.
It will open your eyes, to the duplicity of the UN ,they have sanctioned war crimes, there is no other word for it.
Allowing, Turkey to peruse its agenda, to expand the Otterman Empire, with direct sea access to Libya and Tripoli, where Turkey, supports the mercenaries based there.
On Mr. Tom Harris’ Facebook page he writes,”our frequent opponent Dave James has already given his stupid comment, so I hope FB followers can join in in the comments section.” I don’t know if Peter Dale and Graham Dunton are Facebook friends of Mr. Harris or not but their political arguments against the United Nations do not address my criticisms of Mr. Harris’ and Dr. Jay Lehr’s opinion piece.
Mr. Dale writes, “I have never thought that the UN did anything useful, and whatever it did, it did as expensively as possible. And so I do believe we should get rid of it” but in his next sentence Mr. Dale endorses useful a specialized agencies of the United Nations. According to Mr. Dale, “There some international agencies that do relatively useful work like ICAO, ILO, WHO.” Mr. Dale is self-refuting.
This Disqus profile – https://disqus.com/by/disqus_JzQ88MTX2I/following/ – shows that since March 31, 2016, Dave James has made 4,180 comments. Here is a sample of some of his many, many posts apparently trying to discredit my writings in online article comment sections: https://www.google.ca/search?site=&source=hp&q=%22Tom+Harris%22+%22Dave+James%22&gws_rd=cr&ei=nyGDWefuDavcjwSb-oK4DA . I already explained to Mr. James that many of his points are either wrong or misleading . I will not waste any more time explaining this to him, unless other people bring up the same or similar questions.
Tom Harris is mistaken. Mr. Harris’ credibility is determined by his words not mine. Mr. Harris is being less than honest when he vaguely asserts he has address my criticisms of his opinion piece somewhere else. Mr. Harris has so little confidence in the content of his opinion, he asks his FB followers to join to respond to my “stupid comment.”
Mr. Harris uses petty insult because his arguments don’t do stand-up well when exposed to open and honest debate.