|
Just when you think Arizona hit rock bottom, they bust out the jackhammer and dig the rock bottom deeper.
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/26/11415282-agenda-21-arizona-close-to-passing-anti-un-sustainability-bill?lite
"Among the U.N. declaration’s non-binding principles are calls for sustainable development, environmental protection, eradicating poverty, eliminating unsustainable production and consumption patterns, economic growth and the participation of women in government decisions. “We wouldn’t be able to use CFL light bulbs in state buildings because that would be considered energy efficiency,” Campbell said. Campbell also said that the state’s Economic Security Department, which handles unemployment and welfare benefits, could be outlawed because it has to do with eradicating poverty. Also, Arizona universities have sustainability programs that could be banned if the bill becomes law, Campbell warned."
TL;DR version: Tea party nuts propose bill that could end energy efficient policies, anti-poverty legislation, pollution-reduction, etc etc, all because they agree with UN declarations.
|
North Korea and Arizona never cease to amaze.
|
I just don't get where they find the people that makes these proposals. From the thousands and thousands of Arizona people, why are exactly those guys in the places of power to be able to propose these bills?
Arizona people: please do something.
|
So I was wondering - If you are pregnant before conception in Arizona, doesn't that mean everyone physically inside the state of Arizona is pregnant?
|
That happens when there is political apathy, all the crazy people come forward...
edit: maybe they are possessed, by the devil or so, abusing the (religious) right to throw the world into chaos. (as believable as a UN conspiracy to attack the US middle class and working poor...)
remember. energy efficiency is evil!!!
|
I propose ejecting Arizona from the US, then use it in the way Britain used Australia some 200 years ago, as a penal colony.
|
I think that Arizona seems to be trying to battle Texas for title of most insane state in the union. I just laugh that people allow these things to happen anymore...that is all you can do it seems.
|
On April 27 2012 18:52 Newbistic wrote:
I propose ejecting Arizona from the US, then use it in the way Britain used Australia some 200 years ago, as a penal colony.
you would have to build one hell of a fence/wall 
|
we could just give it to mexico for some burritos
|
|
|
A UN take-over conspiracy theory? Sounds like a good laugh. Need to do some digging and see wtf is up with that.
|
On April 27 2012 19:03 Bill Murray wrote:
we could just give it to mexico for some burritos
Some Mexican places make some mean burritoes. Oh man there was one place that had french fries in the burrito. Was amazing. Definitely worth more than Arizona.
|
O M G ?
i would bash but then i would be banned!
someone save arizona please?
|
Yeah, I was being facetious.
I've been to Arizona. The Grand Canyon alone is worth more to me than any amount of burritos conceivable.
|
isn't the EG team house in arizona?
|
Damn U.N. with their sneaky agenda to help the environment, eradicate poverty, promote women in government...NOT ON MY WATCH SUNSHINE, NOT ON MY WATCH.
(Seriously, citizens of Arizona, what are you doing?)
|
"Among the U.N. declaration’s non-binding principles are calls for sustainable development, environmental protection, eradicating poverty, eliminating unsustainable production and consumption patterns, economic growth and the participation of women in government decisions. “We wouldn’t be able to use CFL light bulbs in state buildings because that would be considered energy efficiency,” Campbell said. Campbell also said that the state’s Economic Security Department, which handles unemployment and welfare benefits, could be outlawed because it has to do with eradicating poverty. Also, Arizona universities have sustainability programs that could be banned if the bill becomes law, Campbell warned."
Truely; one man one vote.. Women back in the kitchen and baby-breeding. Goodness forbid they interfere in society by thinking or expressing their opinions. Geez..
/sarcasm off
|
On April 27 2012 19:25 Banj0 wrote:Show nested quote +"Among the U.N. declaration’s non-binding principles are calls for sustainable development, environmental protection, eradicating poverty, eliminating unsustainable production and consumption patterns, economic growth and the participation of women in government decisions. “We wouldn’t be able to use CFL light bulbs in state buildings because that would be considered energy efficiency,” Campbell said. Campbell also said that the state’s Economic Security Department, which handles unemployment and welfare benefits, could be outlawed because it has to do with eradicating poverty. Also, Arizona universities have sustainability programs that could be banned if the bill becomes law, Campbell warned." Truely; one man one vote.. Women back in the kitchen and baby-breeding. Goodness forbid they interfere in society by thinking or expressing their opinions. Geez.. /sarcasm off
Yeah, what the fuck is this, the Eighteenth Century again? Why can't we get past this sexist bullshit? Oh my god, what an embarrassment....
|
Hey man it doesnt seem that bad, when you live here. Maybe were brainwashed.
|
wait, so it outlaws energy efficient things?
|
As a proud right wing batshit nut, I support sexism towards women. How many walking sandwich makers are made anywhere else? Lol, all jokes aside I feel like arizona is the testing ground for idiotic legislation, crazy buggers.
|
On April 27 2012 19:23 sharky246 wrote:
isn't the EG team house in arizona?
Yes its located in Arizona.
|
Don't know how this is newsworthy until/unless it passes. Some state rebelling against an old 1993 urge to promote sustainability, environmental protection, and other nice-sounding purposes. Does anybody listen to the UN non-binding resolutions, anyways? This is a big who-cares passage. One state against one nonbinding list of principles (I mean, seriously, wtf did it even accomplish, anyways). It's ho hum, just as much as if the state of California passed a nonbinding resolution to encourage the propagation of sustainable energy sources and the elimination or severe reduction in pollution. Flowery words, words, words, and nothing more.
(Also, the collective Knee Jerk reaction to pretend ramifications of all this is very humorous)
|
"Tea Party Nuts"
How do you, the OP, propose we have an objective discussion about the pros and cons of the subject matter when you stereotype every self classified Tea Party member as a "nut?"
|
|
|
Why are proposals worth being news? Anyone can propose the stupidest shit imaginable, that doesn't mean it's real. IF it passes, THEN it becomes news.
|
So now we've devolved to proposing legislation... out of pure spite? Really Arizona?
|
On April 27 2012 19:42 Danglars wrote:
Don't know how this is newsworthy until/unless it passes. Some state rebelling against an old 1993 urge to promote sustainability, environmental protection, and other nice-sounding purposes. Does anybody listen to the UN non-binding resolutions, anyways? This is a big who-cares passage. One state against one nonbinding list of principles (I mean, seriously, wtf did it even accomplish, anyways). It's ho hum, just as much as if the state of California passed a nonbinding resolution to encourage the propagation of sustainable energy sources and the elimination or severe reduction in pollution. Flowery words, words, words, and nothing more.
(Also, the collective Knee Jerk reaction to pretend ramifications of all this is very humorous)
It's not so much the practicalities of it all I'm reacting to it's the principle. The principle of what they're doing in fucking insane, don't you see that?
|
On April 27 2012 19:42 Danglars wrote:
Don't know how this is newsworthy until/unless it passes. Some state rebelling against an old 1993 urge to promote sustainability, environmental protection, and other nice-sounding purposes. Does anybody listen to the UN non-binding resolutions, anyways? This is a big who-cares passage. One state against one nonbinding list of principles (I mean, seriously, wtf did it even accomplish, anyways). It's ho hum, just as much as if the state of California passed a nonbinding resolution to encourage the propagation of sustainable energy sources and the elimination or severe reduction in pollution. Flowery words, words, words, and nothing more.
(Also, the collective Knee Jerk reaction to pretend ramifications of all this is very humorous)
reading comprehension is an useful skill toi have. Legislation will be binding.
|
On April 27 2012 19:51 seiferoth10 wrote:
Why are proposals worth being news? Anyone can propose the stupidest shit imaginable, that doesn't mean it's real. IF it passes, THEN it becomes news.
less discuss it once it's implemented and we can't do nothing about it, oh wait, we didn't do the same for SOPA/PIPA?
|
yeah... that excerpt is ridiculous. Maybe an excerpt from the law not a biased news source, because whatever the source, short of the law itself, I cannot believe anything actually says, you may not use energy efficient bulbs. Maybe it says that Arizona doesn't have to stick to U.N. regulations, but I cannot imagine it says cannot under any circumstances follow any advice or regulation given by UN just to stick it to them :s sounds like sensationalism at its best
|
Even more annoying than the Arizona legislature is how everything is overblown and exaggerated by the ignorance of the masses. Dating pregnancy at the beginning of the last period has been done for decades, it's not some nutjob thing that Arizona invented.
e.g. this is from BBC
The length of your pregnancy is dated from the first day of your last period, even though you actually conceive two weeks or so after this date
omg someone tell reddit that BBC is crazy!
|
United States5162 Posts
On April 27 2012 19:57 HotShizz wrote:
yeah... that excerpt is ridiculous. Maybe an excerpt from the law not a biased news source, because whatever the source, short of the law itself, I cannot believe anything actually says, you may not use energy efficient bulbs. Maybe it says that Arizona doesn't have to stick to U.N. regulations, but I cannot imagine it says cannot under any circumstances follow any advice or regulation given by UN just to stick it to them :s sounds like sensationalism at its best
I figured that as well, but here is the first two paragraphs of the bill.
A. The state of Arizona and all political subdivisions of this state
shall not adopt or implement the creed, doctrine, principles or any tenet of
the United Nations Rio Declaration on Environment and Development and the
Statement of Principles for Sustainable Development adopted at the United
Nations Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro,
Brazil in June, 1992 or any other international law that contravenes the
United States Constitution or the Constitution of Arizona.
B. Since the United Nations has enlisted the support of numerous
independent, shadow organizations to surreptitiously implement this agenda
around the world, the state of Arizona and all political subdivisions are
prohibited from implementing programs of, expending any sum of money for,
being a member of, receiving funding from, contracting services from, or
giving financial or other forms of aid to the International Council for Local
Environmental Initiatives or any of its related or affiliated organizations
including Countdown 2010, Local Action for Biodiversity, European Center for
Nature Conservation, the International Union for Conservation of Nature, and
the President's Council on Sustainable Development, enacted on July 19, 1993
by Executive Order 12852.
This is hypocritical as fuck, too. Their quickness to remove anything 'big government' in their state to protect individual liberty has gone so far that the state government is now infringing on personal liberties by saying people CAN'T do something that they would do probably without any knowledge of the UN resolution.
|
arizona just went full retard
|
On April 27 2012 20:01 Myles wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 19:57 HotShizz wrote:
yeah... that excerpt is ridiculous. Maybe an excerpt from the law not a biased news source, because whatever the source, short of the law itself, I cannot believe anything actually says, you may not use energy efficient bulbs. Maybe it says that Arizona doesn't have to stick to U.N. regulations, but I cannot imagine it says cannot under any circumstances follow any advice or regulation given by UN just to stick it to them :s sounds like sensationalism at its best
I figured that as well, but here is the first two paragraphs of the bill. Show nested quote +A. The state of Arizona and all political subdivisions of this state
shall not adopt or implement the creed, doctrine, principles or any tenet of
the United Nations Rio Declaration on Environment and Development and the
Statement of Principles for Sustainable Development adopted at the United
Nations Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro,
Brazil in June, 1992 or any other international law that contravenes the
United States Constitution or the Constitution of Arizona.
B. Since the United Nations has enlisted the support of numerous
independent, shadow organizations to surreptitiously implement this agenda
around the world, the state of Arizona and all political subdivisions are
prohibited from implementing programs of, expending any sum of money for,
being a member of, receiving funding from, contracting services from, or
giving financial or other forms of aid to the International Council for Local
Environmental Initiatives or any of its related or affiliated organizations
including Countdown 2010, Local Action for Biodiversity, European Center for
Nature Conservation, the International Union for Conservation of Nature, and
the President's Council on Sustainable Development, enacted on July 19, 1993
by Executive Order 12852. This hypocritical as fuck, too. Their quickness to remove anything 'big government' in their state to protect individual liberty has gone so far that the state government is now infringing on personal liberties by saying people CAN'T do something that they would do probably without any knowledge of the UN resolution.
lulz. That excerpt is pretty ridiculous as well. Thanks. I do wonder where they would draw the line on that. Definitely a stupidly written law.
|
United States5162 Posts
On April 27 2012 20:06 HotShizz wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 20:01 Myles wrote:On April 27 2012 19:57 HotShizz wrote:
yeah... that excerpt is ridiculous. Maybe an excerpt from the law not a biased news source, because whatever the source, short of the law itself, I cannot believe anything actually says, you may not use energy efficient bulbs. Maybe it says that Arizona doesn't have to stick to U.N. regulations, but I cannot imagine it says cannot under any circumstances follow any advice or regulation given by UN just to stick it to them :s sounds like sensationalism at its best
I figured that as well, but here is the first two paragraphs of the bill. A. The state of Arizona and all political subdivisions of this state
shall not adopt or implement the creed, doctrine, principles or any tenet of
the United Nations Rio Declaration on Environment and Development and the
Statement of Principles for Sustainable Development adopted at the United
Nations Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro,
Brazil in June, 1992 or any other international law that contravenes the
United States Constitution or the Constitution of Arizona.
B. Since the United Nations has enlisted the support of numerous
independent, shadow organizations to surreptitiously implement this agenda
around the world, the state of Arizona and all political subdivisions are
prohibited from implementing programs of, expending any sum of money for,
being a member of, receiving funding from, contracting services from, or
giving financial or other forms of aid to the International Council for Local
Environmental Initiatives or any of its related or affiliated organizations
including Countdown 2010, Local Action for Biodiversity, European Center for
Nature Conservation, the International Union for Conservation of Nature, and
the President's Council on Sustainable Development, enacted on July 19, 1993
by Executive Order 12852. This hypocritical as fuck, too. Their quickness to remove anything 'big government' in their state to protect individual liberty has gone so far that the state government is now infringing on personal liberties by saying people CAN'T do something that they would do probably without any knowledge of the UN resolution. lulz. That excerpt is pretty ridiculous as well. Thanks. I do wonder where they would draw the line on that. Definitely a stupidly written law.
Looking further into the law, it applies to any
For the purposes of this section, "political subdivision" means all
state, county, city, town, public local entity, public-partnership or any
other public entity."
which at least means they won't be telling private residence what to do, but still seems way overarching.
|
As a European with little knowledge of all the different states, can someone explain to me why it's always Arizona that seems to appears in these strange stories. Whenever I find myself doing some old-fashioned facepalming at the insanity of the US legal system, it seems to center around Arizona in particular.
What is it about that state? Is it a cultural thing or does the education system there just not function as intended?
|
Arizona: usa's usa!
sorry  i love you.
|
On April 27 2012 20:10 Lann555 wrote:
As a European with little knowledge of all the different states, can someone explain to me why it's always Arizona that seems to appears in these strange stories. Whenever I find myself doing some old-fashioned facepalming at the insanity of the US legal system, it seems to center around Arizona in particular.
What is it about that state? Is it a cultural thing or does the education system there just not function as intended?
republican state
religious state
southern state
PS: usually florida is notorious for its retardedness but lately arizona is coming up strong aswell
|
B. Since the United Nations has enlisted the support of numerous
independent, shadow organizations to surreptitiously implement this agenda
around the world, ...
What shadow organizations are they talking about? I haven't heard about any hidden or highly secretive UN organizations.
|
On April 27 2012 20:16 archonOOid wrote:Show nested quote +B. Since the United Nations has enlisted the support of numerous
independent, shadow organizations to surreptitiously implement this agenda
around the world, ... What shadow organizations are they talking about? I haven't heard about any hidden or highly secretive UN organizations.
isnt that self-implying? :D
|
On April 27 2012 20:14 teddyoojo wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 20:10 Lann555 wrote:
As a European with little knowledge of all the different states, can someone explain to me why it's always Arizona that seems to appears in these strange stories. Whenever I find myself doing some old-fashioned facepalming at the insanity of the US legal system, it seems to center around Arizona in particular.
What is it about that state? Is it a cultural thing or does the education system there just not function as intended? republican state religious state southern state the really weird churches are strong therePS: usually florida is notorious for its retardedness but lately arizona is coming up strong aswell
What churches would that be? It's not the Mormon state right?
|
USA USA USA!
lol. Anyway, it's Arizona I have come to expect nothing less.
|
On April 27 2012 20:16 archonOOid wrote:Show nested quote +B. Since the United Nations has enlisted the support of numerous
independent, shadow organizations to surreptitiously implement this agenda
around the world, ... What shadow organizations are they talking about? I haven't heard about any hidden or highly secretive UN organizations.
The oh so mighty security council maybe XD.
|
I'm not sure which is more hilarious. Arizona's proposed legislation or the people defending them and saying everyone is sensationalizing and being ignorant. Deniers gonna deny...
I Am Arizona (And So Can You!) :D
|
On April 27 2012 20:01 Myles wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 19:57 HotShizz wrote:
yeah... that excerpt is ridiculous. Maybe an excerpt from the law not a biased news source, because whatever the source, short of the law itself, I cannot believe anything actually says, you may not use energy efficient bulbs. Maybe it says that Arizona doesn't have to stick to U.N. regulations, but I cannot imagine it says cannot under any circumstances follow any advice or regulation given by UN just to stick it to them :s sounds like sensationalism at its best
I figured that as well, but here is the first two paragraphs of the bill. Show nested quote +A. The state of Arizona and all political subdivisions of this state
shall not adopt or implement the creed, doctrine, principles or any tenet of
the United Nations Rio Declaration on Environment and Development and the
Statement of Principles for Sustainable Development adopted at the United
Nations Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro,
Brazil in June, 1992 or any other international law that contravenes the
United States Constitution or the Constitution of Arizona.
B. Since the United Nations has enlisted the support of numerous
independent, shadow organizations to surreptitiously implement this agenda
around the world, the state of Arizona and all political subdivisions are
prohibited from implementing programs of, expending any sum of money for,
being a member of, receiving funding from, contracting services from, or
giving financial or other forms of aid to the International Council for Local
Environmental Initiatives or any of its related or affiliated organizations
including Countdown 2010, Local Action for Biodiversity, European Center for
Nature Conservation, the International Union for Conservation of Nature, and
the President's Council on Sustainable Development, enacted on July 19, 1993
by Executive Order 12852. This is hypocritical as fuck, too. Their quickness to remove anything 'big government' in their state to protect individual liberty has gone so far that the state government is now infringing on personal liberties by saying people CAN'T do something that they would do probably without any knowledge of the UN resolution.
Wow. So it isn't just pushback against the UN, it also would outlaw helping or giving/recieving money from the political subdivision known as "President's Council on Sustainable Development, enacted on July 19, 1993 by Executive Order 12852". Basically, Arizona is outlawing a Presidential Executive Decision in its state. The traitorous south will rise again!
|
On April 27 2012 20:17 Lann555 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 20:14 teddyoojo wrote:On April 27 2012 20:10 Lann555 wrote:
As a European with little knowledge of all the different states, can someone explain to me why it's always Arizona that seems to appears in these strange stories. Whenever I find myself doing some old-fashioned facepalming at the insanity of the US legal system, it seems to center around Arizona in particular.
What is it about that state? Is it a cultural thing or does the education system there just not function as intended? republican state religious state southern state the really weird churches are strong therePS: usually florida is notorious for its retardedness but lately arizona is coming up strong aswell What churches would that be? It's not the Mormon state right?
fundamentalist churches I think. Not sure about it tho.
|
On April 27 2012 20:17 Lann555 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 20:14 teddyoojo wrote:On April 27 2012 20:10 Lann555 wrote:
As a European with little knowledge of all the different states, can someone explain to me why it's always Arizona that seems to appears in these strange stories. Whenever I find myself doing some old-fashioned facepalming at the insanity of the US legal system, it seems to center around Arizona in particular.
What is it about that state? Is it a cultural thing or does the education system there just not function as intended? republican state religious state southern state the really weird churches are strong therePS: usually florida is notorious for its retardedness but lately arizona is coming up strong aswell What churches would that be? It's not the Mormon state right?
mormons are pretty strong there aswell ( The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints)
but know that i think about it its nothing compared to couple of other states so i think i delete that part
|
Fundamentalist Southern Baptists would be my first guess.
|
What the serious F. This isn't going to pass even in Arizona........ I mean, not even Arizona has gone this crazy right?
|
I don't consider it a coincidence that most all comments in this thread - and on the entire forum - reads as if they were written by an idiot. Can you understand what I am implying? Leftist morons.
I'm happy to be banned. Fuck you TL - special mention to the hypocritical admins.
User was banned for this post.
|
|
|
Well this is just plain dump...
The planet should start to work together instead of fighting war on the planet itself
if you dont get that you are a moron easy as that...
And the forum isnt only populated by leftys its actually pretty even ^^
|
|
|
|
|
On April 27 2012 20:20 Fyrewolf wrote:
Wow. So it isn't just pushback against the UN, it also would outlaw helping or giving/recieving money from the political subdivision known as "President's Council on Sustainable Development, enacted on July 19, 1993
by Executive Order 12852". Basically, Arizona is outlawing a Presidential Executive Decision in its state. The traitorous south will rise again!
So why can decisions be made in the US solely on the premise of what the President wants. That is a dictatorship and Arizona is one of the few states actually trying to stop this damn country from turning into a dictatorship. Why should a state in my country have to put up with crap the UN spams out the nose, or that the President of my country can force any law down by refusing to sign it. This country is finished if any decision can be overturned BY ONE SINGLE MAN. Theres a reason we have 3 branches of the government, I've read the whole article and all I see is "Arizona wants to get out of agreements forced on them by one man in a resolution that didn't get ratified in congress." GO ARIZONA!
Arizona is one of the few states trying to stand up for itself when the rest of the country is being brainwashed by the system. Washington won't protect them from illegal immigration, they stand up for themselves and everyone hates their laws. You don't like their laws, you throw them out or leave the state. Why should any state have to live up to agreements by people they can't elect. UN can have all these resolutions, but they have no real power and if Arizona wants to go against them they (the UN) have no muscle to use against them. This isn't about "anti-energy efficent" or "anti-poverty" its about protecting those who care about people that don't even live there telling them what they have to do.
If this was so important, and people needed the "President's Council on Sustainable Development" so badly congress would have passed it and not have needed an Executive order by Clinton. Executive orders aren't law, its just like those teachers' notes that let you get out of things just on a bigger scale.
Lets say this passes, nothings going to change. Lightbulbs aren't going to be thrown out because you already use them, programs like unemployment and welfare aren't going to be eliminated right after it signs. Most of the political crap are just using it to score points in a damn election year. Not much is going to change, unless you actually mind your state buying less energy efficient light bulbs because they are cheaper than the energy efficent ones. Most of what these politicans are saying are going to be in Arizona political commercials, just to get you to vote for the other guy. I wish New York was more like Arizona, I'd actually be able to stand state politicians a little more.
|
On April 27 2012 19:49 Joedaddy wrote:
"Tea Party Nuts"
How do you, the OP, propose we have an objective discussion about the pros and cons of the subject matter when you stereotype every self classified Tea Party member as a "nut?"
Where exactly did the OP say that all Tea Party members were nuts? He said that there were Tea party members who were nuts behind the bill, which is very different from saying anyone who self identifies with the group are nuts. Even I wouldn't go that far and I'm about as left wing as it gets.
|
On April 27 2012 21:04 Hsanrb wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 20:20 Fyrewolf wrote:
Wow. So it isn't just pushback against the UN, it also would outlaw helping or giving/recieving money from the political subdivision known as "President's Council on Sustainable Development, enacted on July 19, 1993
by Executive Order 12852". Basically, Arizona is outlawing a Presidential Executive Decision in its state. The traitorous south will rise again! So why can decisions be made in the US solely on the premise of what the President wants. That is a dictatorship and Arizona is one of the few states actually trying to stop this damn country from turning into a dictatorship. Why should a state in my country have to put up with crap the UN spams out the nose, or that the President of my country can force any law down by refusing to sign it. This country is finished if any decision can be overturned BY ONE SINGLE MAN. Theres a reason we have 3 branches of the government, I've read the whole article and all I see is "Arizona wants to get out of agreements forced on them by one man in a resolution that didn't get ratified in congress." GO ARIZONA! Arizona is one of the few states trying to stand up for itself when the rest of the country is being brainwashed by the system. Washington won't protect them from illegal immigration, they stand up for themselves and everyone hates their laws. You don't like their laws, you throw them out or leave the state. Why should any state have to live up to agreements by people they can't elect. UN can have all these resolutions, but they have no real power and if Arizona wants to go against them they (the UN) have no muscle to use against them. This isn't about "anti-energy efficent" or "anti-poverty" its about protecting those who care about people that don't even live there telling them what they have to do. If this was so important, and people needed the "President's Council on Sustainable Development" so badly congress would have passed it and not have needed an Executive order by Clinton. Executive orders aren't law, its just like those teachers' notes that let you get out of things just on a bigger scale. Lets say this passes, nothings going to change. Lightbulbs aren't going to be thrown out because you already use them, programs like unemployment and welfare aren't going to be eliminated right after it signs. Most of the political crap are just using it to score points in a damn election year. Not much is going to change, unless you actually mind your state buying less energy efficient light bulbs because they are cheaper than the energy efficent ones. Most of what these politicans are saying are going to be in Arizona political commercials, just to get you to vote for the other guy. I wish New York was more like Arizona, I'd actually be able to stand state politicians a little more.
Quite a response for a four sentence post I made ending in a joke. You seem to be arguing for checks and balances, but also denounce "that the President of my country can force any law down by refusing to sign it.", one of those very same checks and balances. Great job, Hypocrite.
As for the other part of the question there "Why should a state in my country have to put up with crap the UN spams out the nose, or that the President of my country can force any law down by refusing to sign it"
That's the price of being in the UN and getting to be on the security council. If we want to stay a member, we have to do what it says. We also have a say in what it says because we are on the security council. And all of the things Arizona are rebelling against the UN for are non-binding. Arizona is also being told to do the same kind of things by the US goverment. Even if you may not like executive decision, it is a necessary tool for the government to have.
I also like how you are arguing that if people don't like the Arizona laws, the proper way to deal with it is "You don't like their laws, you throw them out or leave the state." as in your immigration example. So.... Why should the US not throw Arizona out of the country for not liking the executive decision?
|
On April 27 2012 21:04 Hsanrb wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 20:20 Fyrewolf wrote:
Wow. So it isn't just pushback against the UN, it also would outlaw helping or giving/recieving money from the political subdivision known as "President's Council on Sustainable Development, enacted on July 19, 1993
by Executive Order 12852". Basically, Arizona is outlawing a Presidential Executive Decision in its state. The traitorous south will rise again! Arizona is one of the few states trying to stand up for itself when the rest of the country is being brainwashed by the system. Washington won't protect them from illegal immigration, they stand up for themselves and everyone hates their laws. You don't like their laws, you throw them out or leave the state. Why should any state have to live up to agreements by people they can't elect. UN can have all these resolutions, but they have no real power and if Arizona wants to go against them they (the UN) have no muscle to use against them. This isn't about "anti-energy efficent" or "anti-poverty" its about protecting those who care about people that don't even live there telling them what they have to do. If this was so important, and people needed the "President's Council on Sustainable Development" so badly congress would have passed it and not have needed an Executive order by Clinton. Executive orders aren't law, its just like those teachers' notes that let you get out of things just on a bigger scale.
Who, such a display of ignorance is amazing, congratulations ! read a bit about Kelsen and the UN before coming back plz, it'd help you so much to understand how your country functions.
|
Why is the Arizona like this?
|
On April 27 2012 21:29 sAsImre wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 20:20 Fyrewolf wrote:
Arizona is one of the few states trying to stand up for itself when the rest of the country is being brainwashed by the system. Washington won't protect them from illegal immigration, they stand up for themselves and everyone hates their laws. You don't like their laws, you throw them out or leave the state. Why should any state have to live up to agreements by people they can't elect. UN can have all these resolutions, but they have no real power and if Arizona wants to go against them they (the UN) have no muscle to use against them. This isn't about "anti-energy efficent" or "anti-poverty" its about protecting those who care about people that don't even live there telling them what they have to do.
If this was so important, and people needed the "President's Council on Sustainable Development" so badly congress would have passed it and not have needed an Executive order by Clinton. Executive orders aren't law, its just like those teachers' notes that let you get out of things just on a bigger scale.
Who, such a display of ignorance is amazing, congratulations ! read a bit about Kelsen and the UN before coming back plz, it'd help you so much.
You are misquoting, that is supposed to be Hsanrb, not me. Please fix.
|
On April 27 2012 21:30 Fyrewolf wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 21:29 sAsImre wrote:On April 27 2012 20:20 Fyrewolf wrote:
Arizona is one of the few states trying to stand up for itself when the rest of the country is being brainwashed by the system. Washington won't protect them from illegal immigration, they stand up for themselves and everyone hates their laws. You don't like their laws, you throw them out or leave the state. Why should any state have to live up to agreements by people they can't elect. UN can have all these resolutions, but they have no real power and if Arizona wants to go against them they (the UN) have no muscle to use against them. This isn't about "anti-energy efficent" or "anti-poverty" its about protecting those who care about people that don't even live there telling them what they have to do.
If this was so important, and people needed the "President's Council on Sustainable Development" so badly congress would have passed it and not have needed an Executive order by Clinton. Executive orders aren't law, its just like those teachers' notes that let you get out of things just on a bigger scale.
Who, such a display of ignorance is amazing, congratulations ! read a bit about Kelsen and the UN before coming back plz, it'd help you so much. You are misquoting, that is supposed to be Hsanrb, not me. Please fix.
My bad, done. I apologize for my mistake sir.
|
wow, north korea is really going to step up its game if it plans to keep the title of craziest place on earth.
seriously, what the hell is wrong with arizona, and to a lesser degree america in general?
if us states were like tv programs arizona would be like that lowest common denominator reality tv, kind of a cross between who wants to marry a millionaire and the real housewives of wherever. then again, the world needs clowns to help us remember how important it is to promote education, sustainability, and women's rights. so i say lets give them a lifetime supply of tinfoil to make thier hats with, if nothing else it might keep them busy for a while and thus keep them from doing something even stupider in the meantime.
|
I love the neutrality in the op.
|
How could a paragraph so tiny, kill off so many of my brain cells?
Can someone explain any rationale behind such a bill? Please?
|
On April 27 2012 21:23 Fyrewolf wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 21:04 Hsanrb wrote:On April 27 2012 20:20 Fyrewolf wrote:
Wow. So it isn't just pushback against the UN, it also would outlaw helping or giving/recieving money from the political subdivision known as "President's Council on Sustainable Development, enacted on July 19, 1993
by Executive Order 12852". Basically, Arizona is outlawing a Presidential Executive Decision in its state. The traitorous south will rise again! So why can decisions be made in the US solely on the premise of what the President wants. That is a dictatorship and Arizona is one of the few states actually trying to stop this damn country from turning into a dictatorship. Why should a state in my country have to put up with crap the UN spams out the nose, or that the President of my country can force any law down by refusing to sign it. This country is finished if any decision can be overturned BY ONE SINGLE MAN. Theres a reason we have 3 branches of the government, I've read the whole article and all I see is "Arizona wants to get out of agreements forced on them by one man in a resolution that didn't get ratified in congress." GO ARIZONA! Arizona is one of the few states trying to stand up for itself when the rest of the country is being brainwashed by the system. Washington won't protect them from illegal immigration, they stand up for themselves and everyone hates their laws. You don't like their laws, you throw them out or leave the state. Why should any state have to live up to agreements by people they can't elect. UN can have all these resolutions, but they have no real power and if Arizona wants to go against them they (the UN) have no muscle to use against them. This isn't about "anti-energy efficent" or "anti-poverty" its about protecting those who care about people that don't even live there telling them what they have to do. If this was so important, and people needed the "President's Council on Sustainable Development" so badly congress would have passed it and not have needed an Executive order by Clinton. Executive orders aren't law, its just like those teachers' notes that let you get out of things just on a bigger scale. Lets say this passes, nothings going to change. Lightbulbs aren't going to be thrown out because you already use them, programs like unemployment and welfare aren't going to be eliminated right after it signs. Most of the political crap are just using it to score points in a damn election year. Not much is going to change, unless you actually mind your state buying less energy efficient light bulbs because they are cheaper than the energy efficent ones. Most of what these politicans are saying are going to be in Arizona political commercials, just to get you to vote for the other guy. I wish New York was more like Arizona, I'd actually be able to stand state politicians a little more. Quite a response for a four sentence post I made ending in a joke. You seem to be arguing for checks and balances, but also denounce "that the President of my country can force any law down by refusing to sign it.", one of those very same checks and balances. Great job, Hypocrite. As for the other part of the question there "Why should a state in my country have to put up with crap the UN spams out the nose, or that the President of my country can force any law down by refusing to sign it" That's the price of being in the UN and getting to be on the security council. If we want to stay a member, we have to do what it says. We also have a say in what it says because we are on the security council. And all of the things Arizona are rebelling against the UN for are non-binding. Arizona is also being told to do the same kind of things by the US goverment. Even if you may not like executive decision, it is a necessary tool for the government to have. I also like how you are arguing that if people don't like the Arizona laws, the proper way to deal with it is "You don't like their laws, you throw them out or leave the state." as in your immigration example. So.... Why should the US not throw Arizona out of the country for not liking the executive decision?
I think it might be of use to you to read up some American history, preferably right around the time of the founding fathers.
|
Did you guys even read the article?
"Rep. Terri Proud, R-Tucson, told supporters in an email that the U.N. declaration “will take away our rights as Americans by allowing the United Nations to mandate laws on our soil,” the AzCapitolTimes.com reported. “It’s very real and it is happening.”
The UN Has no right to tell any state in the Union what to do. This is what this bill proposes, get the UN out of our government.
Agenda 21 is POPULATION CONTROL. United Nations is unconstitutional we shouldn't even be in the united nations. Please wake up. And yah im from Arizona.
|
On April 27 2012 20:17 Lann555 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 20:14 teddyoojo wrote:On April 27 2012 20:10 Lann555 wrote:
As a European with little knowledge of all the different states, can someone explain to me why it's always Arizona that seems to appears in these strange stories. Whenever I find myself doing some old-fashioned facepalming at the insanity of the US legal system, it seems to center around Arizona in particular.
What is it about that state? Is it a cultural thing or does the education system there just not function as intended? republican state religious state southern state the really weird churches are strong therePS: usually florida is notorious for its retardedness but lately arizona is coming up strong aswell What churches would that be? It's not the Mormon state right?
Haha no, Arizona isn't *the* Mormon state. That's Utah, especially in its capital: Salt Lake City...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salt_Lake_City
|
On April 27 2012 21:33 sAsImre wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 21:30 Fyrewolf wrote:On April 27 2012 21:29 sAsImre wrote:On April 27 2012 20:20 Fyrewolf wrote:
Arizona is one of the few states trying to stand up for itself when the rest of the country is being brainwashed by the system. Washington won't protect them from illegal immigration, they stand up for themselves and everyone hates their laws. You don't like their laws, you throw them out or leave the state. Why should any state have to live up to agreements by people they can't elect. UN can have all these resolutions, but they have no real power and if Arizona wants to go against them they (the UN) have no muscle to use against them. This isn't about "anti-energy efficent" or "anti-poverty" its about protecting those who care about people that don't even live there telling them what they have to do.
If this was so important, and people needed the "President's Council on Sustainable Development" so badly congress would have passed it and not have needed an Executive order by Clinton. Executive orders aren't law, its just like those teachers' notes that let you get out of things just on a bigger scale.
Who, such a display of ignorance is amazing, congratulations ! read a bit about Kelsen and the UN before coming back plz, it'd help you so much. You are misquoting, that is supposed to be Hsanrb, not me. Please fix. My bad, done. I apologize for my mistake sir.
Thank you very much, and thank you for the apology as well. I appreciate you taking the time to fix that, I really didn't want to be associated with that level of ignorance and naivete.
|
On April 27 2012 21:40 Fyrewolf wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 21:33 sAsImre wrote:On April 27 2012 21:30 Fyrewolf wrote:On April 27 2012 21:29 sAsImre wrote:On April 27 2012 20:20 Fyrewolf wrote:
Arizona is one of the few states trying to stand up for itself when the rest of the country is being brainwashed by the system. Washington won't protect them from illegal immigration, they stand up for themselves and everyone hates their laws. You don't like their laws, you throw them out or leave the state. Why should any state have to live up to agreements by people they can't elect. UN can have all these resolutions, but they have no real power and if Arizona wants to go against them they (the UN) have no muscle to use against them. This isn't about "anti-energy efficent" or "anti-poverty" its about protecting those who care about people that don't even live there telling them what they have to do.
If this was so important, and people needed the "President's Council on Sustainable Development" so badly congress would have passed it and not have needed an Executive order by Clinton. Executive orders aren't law, its just like those teachers' notes that let you get out of things just on a bigger scale.
Who, such a display of ignorance is amazing, congratulations ! read a bit about Kelsen and the UN before coming back plz, it'd help you so much. You are misquoting, that is supposed to be Hsanrb, not me. Please fix. My bad, done. I apologize for my mistake sir. Thank you very much, and thank you for the apology as well. I appreciate you taking the time to fix that, I really didn't want to be associated with that level of ignorance and naivete.
Well that demonstration of dumbness was quite amazing but I fear that it's not really exceptionnal.
On April 27 2012 21:40 sinno wrote:
Did you guys even read the article?
"Rep. Terri Proud, R-Tucson, told supporters in an email that the U.N. declaration “will take away our rights as Americans by allowing the United Nations to mandate laws on our soil,” the AzCapitolTimes.com reported. “It’s very real and it is happening.”
The UN Has no right to tell any state in the Union what to do. This is what this bill proposes, get the UN out of our government.
Agenda 21 is POPULATION CONTROL. United Nations is unconstitutional we shouldn't even be in the united nations. Please wake up. And yah im from Arizona.
Did you read the statutes of the UN? You'd have learn that it has no power to enforce anything without the state Consent. And it's not against your outdated constitution nor your case law (AFAIK for the latter)
|
On April 27 2012 21:40 sinno wrote:
Did you guys even read the article?
"Rep. Terri Proud, R-Tucson, told supporters in an email that the U.N. declaration “will take away our rights as Americans by allowing the United Nations to mandate laws on our soil,” the AzCapitolTimes.com reported. “It’s very real and it is happening.”
The UN Has no right to tell any state in the Union what to do. This is what this bill proposes, get the UN out of our government.
Agenda 21 is POPULATION CONTROL. United Nations is unconstitutional we shouldn't even be in the united nations. Please wake up. And yah im from Arizona.
What about the rights of Americans who agree with the UN? Do you actually believe a state should be able to make it illegal for a political party or other public entity to agree with the UN's stance on these issues? That is incredibly overreaching don't you think?
|
"outdated constitution" Yah because freedoms written down in a document can be "OUTDATED" lol!!!!!!!!!!
|
On April 27 2012 21:41 sAsImre wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 21:40 Fyrewolf wrote:On April 27 2012 21:33 sAsImre wrote:On April 27 2012 21:30 Fyrewolf wrote:On April 27 2012 21:29 sAsImre wrote:On April 27 2012 20:20 Fyrewolf wrote:
Arizona is one of the few states trying to stand up for itself when the rest of the country is being brainwashed by the system. Washington won't protect them from illegal immigration, they stand up for themselves and everyone hates their laws. You don't like their laws, you throw them out or leave the state. Why should any state have to live up to agreements by people they can't elect. UN can have all these resolutions, but they have no real power and if Arizona wants to go against them they (the UN) have no muscle to use against them. This isn't about "anti-energy efficent" or "anti-poverty" its about protecting those who care about people that don't even live there telling them what they have to do.
If this was so important, and people needed the "President's Council on Sustainable Development" so badly congress would have passed it and not have needed an Executive order by Clinton. Executive orders aren't law, its just like those teachers' notes that let you get out of things just on a bigger scale.
Who, such a display of ignorance is amazing, congratulations ! read a bit about Kelsen and the UN before coming back plz, it'd help you so much. You are misquoting, that is supposed to be Hsanrb, not me. Please fix. My bad, done. I apologize for my mistake sir. Thank you very much, and thank you for the apology as well. I appreciate you taking the time to fix that, I really didn't want to be associated with that level of ignorance and naivete. Well that demonstration of dumbness was quite amazing but I fear that it's not really exceptionnal. Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 21:40 sinno wrote:
Did you guys even read the article?
"Rep. Terri Proud, R-Tucson, told supporters in an email that the U.N. declaration “will take away our rights as Americans by allowing the United Nations to mandate laws on our soil,” the AzCapitolTimes.com reported. “It’s very real and it is happening.”
The UN Has no right to tell any state in the Union what to do. This is what this bill proposes, get the UN out of our government.
Agenda 21 is POPULATION CONTROL. United Nations is unconstitutional we shouldn't even be in the united nations. Please wake up. And yah im from Arizona. Did you read the statutes of the UN? You'd have learn that it has no power to enforce anything without the state Consent. And it's not against your outdated constitution nor your case law (AFAIK for the latter)
So you're worked up about the redundant nature of the legislation?
|
On April 27 2012 21:45 sinno wrote:
"outdated constitution" Yah because freedoms written down in a document can be "OUTDATED" lol!!!!!!!!!!
freedoms are relative like any legal or political concept.
|
On April 27 2012 21:40 sinno wrote:
Did you guys even read the article?
"Rep. Terri Proud, R-Tucson, told supporters in an email that the U.N. declaration “will take away our rights as Americans by allowing the United Nations to mandate laws on our soil,” the AzCapitolTimes.com reported. “It’s very real and it is happening.”
The UN Has no right to tell any state in the Union what to do. This is what this bill proposes, get the UN out of our government.
Agenda 21 is POPULATION CONTROL. United Nations is unconstitutional we shouldn't even be in the united nations. Please wake up. And yah im from Arizona.
The UN plays a big part in the US control of the world. Any binding resolution goes through the US (along with the other 4 veto powers, UK, France, China and Russia), and if the US doesn't like it, it wont pass. The UN can only impose, on any state or any country, that which the US agrees to and as such it's everything but very real or happening. The US should give up its veto along with the rest of the veto powers to allow for a more functioning UN but that's another debate. If that were to happen then maybe Arizona would be right in acting stupid, as opposed to right now. It seems to me that US politics is full of misinformation, from all sides. It's a sad affair indeed.
On April 27 2012 21:45 sinno wrote:
"outdated constitution" Yah because freedoms written down in a document can be "OUTDATED" lol!!!!!!!!!!
"My teacher told me they can't be outdated and I lack any further understanding of the issue so I'll regurgitate that without even stating my teacher as my source!"
At least argue for why the constitution should be (or is, I suppose) eternal. The fact that the constitution is repeatedly interpreted and reinterpreted through the supreme court seems to be in conflict in your statement. Also, see post directly above mine.
|
On April 27 2012 21:44 screamingpalm wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 21:40 sinno wrote:
Did you guys even read the article?
"Rep. Terri Proud, R-Tucson, told supporters in an email that the U.N. declaration “will take away our rights as Americans by allowing the United Nations to mandate laws on our soil,” the AzCapitolTimes.com reported. “It’s very real and it is happening.”
The UN Has no right to tell any state in the Union what to do. This is what this bill proposes, get the UN out of our government.
Agenda 21 is POPULATION CONTROL. United Nations is unconstitutional we shouldn't even be in the united nations. Please wake up. And yah im from Arizona. What about the rights of Americans who agree with the UN? Do you actually believe a state should be able to make it illegal for a political party or other public entity to agree with the UN's stance on these issues? That is incredibly overreaching don't you think?
I may be wrong, but I do believe that the UN and an American party are quite different. Should a party adopt the policies of the UN and win elections, they could enforce them in any way they chose (or chose to renegade on election processes which seems to be quite the trend).
|
"rights of the americans who agree with the UN"
Well to be honest with you this is a republic. The rights of the people can't be taken away sorry. Whether some Americans believe in the UN (For whatever reason I have no clue its obviously turning into a Global Army for mass slaughter) or not isnt the point. Its unconstitutional and America shouldn't be involved in it, period.
Research Agenda 21 it was proposed by George Bush's dad. They think that the world is being over populated and needs to be controlled. Which is a FARSE, there is more then enough to go around for everybody on this planet. And too think we need population control is complete brain washing.
Fact: If every person in the world was given 1200 sq ft of living space it would only take up the space of about Texas. So like i said there is more then enough to go around.
What you learn is that most conspiracy theories aren't theories anymore.
|
On April 27 2012 21:49 fortheGG wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 21:44 screamingpalm wrote:On April 27 2012 21:40 sinno wrote:
Did you guys even read the article?
"Rep. Terri Proud, R-Tucson, told supporters in an email that the U.N. declaration “will take away our rights as Americans by allowing the United Nations to mandate laws on our soil,” the AzCapitolTimes.com reported. “It’s very real and it is happening.”
The UN Has no right to tell any state in the Union what to do. This is what this bill proposes, get the UN out of our government.
Agenda 21 is POPULATION CONTROL. United Nations is unconstitutional we shouldn't even be in the united nations. Please wake up. And yah im from Arizona. What about the rights of Americans who agree with the UN? Do you actually believe a state should be able to make it illegal for a political party or other public entity to agree with the UN's stance on these issues? That is incredibly overreaching don't you think? I may be wrong, but I do believe that the UN and an American party are quite different. Should a party adopt the policies of the UN and win elections, they could enforce them in any way they chose (or chose to renegade on election processes which seems to be quite the trend).
There are various way to adopt a resolution in the UN, but most of it consist of a 60% majority vote in the assembly and a similar vote in the security council without a veto. Most of it consist either in unbinding resolutions or military/humanitary action. There is no fine system so if you sign something and don't apply it there is no direct consequences. And no consequences at all for the US. The unbinding stuff has 0 consequences for most countries, it's just a guideline. And this bill basically say that this guideline should be forbidden and nothing related to it should be accepted, which is mindblowing to say the least.
On April 27 2012 21:50 sinno wrote:
"rights of the americans who agree with the UN"
Well to be honest with you this is a republic. The rights of the people can't be taken away sorry. Whether some Americans believe in the UN (For whatever reason I have no clue its obviously turning into a Global Army for mass slaughter) or not isnt the point. Its unconstitutional and America shouldn't be involved in it, period.
Research Agenda 21 it was proposed by George Bush's dad. They think that the world is being over populated and needs to be controlled. Which is a FARSE, there is more then enough to go around for everybody on this planet. And too think we need population control is complete brain washing.
Fact: If every person in the world was given 1200 sq ft of living space it would only take up the space of about Texas. So like i said there is more then enough to go around.
What you learn is that most conspiracy theories aren't theories anymore.
International relationships don't care about the individuals. And conspirationist theories are for uneducated sheeps, but it seems to reach its target far too often.
|
On April 27 2012 21:49 fortheGG wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 21:44 screamingpalm wrote:On April 27 2012 21:40 sinno wrote:
Did you guys even read the article?
"Rep. Terri Proud, R-Tucson, told supporters in an email that the U.N. declaration “will take away our rights as Americans by allowing the United Nations to mandate laws on our soil,” the AzCapitolTimes.com reported. “It’s very real and it is happening.”
The UN Has no right to tell any state in the Union what to do. This is what this bill proposes, get the UN out of our government.
Agenda 21 is POPULATION CONTROL. United Nations is unconstitutional we shouldn't even be in the united nations. Please wake up. And yah im from Arizona. What about the rights of Americans who agree with the UN? Do you actually believe a state should be able to make it illegal for a political party or other public entity to agree with the UN's stance on these issues? That is incredibly overreaching don't you think? I may be wrong, but I do believe that the UN and an American party are quite different. Should a party adopt the policies of the UN and win elections, they could enforce them in any way they chose (or chose to renegade on election processes which seems to be quite the trend).
Of course, but this proposal seems to outlaw such practice, at least at the state level.
|
"conspirationist theories are uneducated sheeps" Awesome opinion you got here. Could you back it up with some facts to prove your point? Im afraid your probably lost in translation. But of course as the saying goes you dont know what you dont know.
|
On April 27 2012 21:50 sinno wrote:
"rights of the americans who agree with the UN"
Well to be honest with you this is a republic. The rights of the people can't be taken away sorry. Whether some Americans believe in the UN (For whatever reason I have no clue its obviously turning into a Global Army for mass slaughter) or not isnt the point. Its unconstitutional and America shouldn't be involved in it, period.
Research Agenda 21 it was proposed by George Bush's dad. They think that the world is being over populated and needs to be controlled. Which is a FARSE, there is more then enough to go around for everybody on this planet. And too think we need population control is complete brain washing.
Fact: If every person in the world was given 1200 sq ft of living space it would only take up the space of about Texas. So like i said there is more then enough to go around.
What you learn is that most conspiracy theories aren't theories anymore.
Wow this is hilarious. First of all people absolutely need to be controlled, by laws, norms and society as a whole. Structured society is impossible without some form of control. There's always a careful balance to be had here between freedom and structure/security. To believe you don't live in a structured society as it is would be beyond foolish. Likewise, believing life would be better without it is even more foolish than that.
As for the UN you don't have any understanding of the issue at all. Why don't you pick up a book or two which can explain both how the world goes around (there's lots of different, exciting schools of thought here which all play their part in explaining states and people's behaviour in different parts of the world and in their interaction with eachother) and the structure of the UN and what it does, and does not, do. And by the way, the UN will never have an army of its own, and any army that it does throw together from its member countries are by necessity sanctioned by the US (alond with the other veto powers, see my previous post).
Unfortunately your education in these areas are glaringly insufficient for a proper discussion.
On April 27 2012 21:57 sinno wrote:
"conspirationist theories are uneducated sheeps" Awesome opinion you got here. Could you back it up with some facts to prove your point? Im afraid your probably lost in translation. But of course as the saying goes you dont know what you dont know.
Conspiracy theorists by definition do not require facts to back up their statement. The most common technique employed is to use some real fact and then fill in any blanks you find to fit the story you want to be true. Some people cannot accept that something massive happened because of something that seems, for them, so insignificant so there must be more to it. A prime example of that would be the long living (and competing) 9/11 conspiracy theories, althought if you look at all published facts nothing actually points to it being a conspiracy. Lack of understanding, for example that steel doesn't need to melt only to weaken to not be able to support a structure, leads to people drawing faulty conclusions. Sometimes it's the exact opposite, that things must have a simple explanation because they cannot grasp the complexity. Now we're touching on the grounds of the world being run by banker familys controlling everything and everyone. Something that's relevant to some conspiracy theories is the want or need of community and togetherness and the feeling being different from, and better than, everyone else. This is showcased very well in the excellent movie The Wave althought it's not conspiracy theory related.
Now, just like faith, you're free to believe whatever you want. But your belief doesn't make it true, and you are not entitlted to your own facts.
|
lolol wait... arizona... what?? what are u doing???
|
On April 27 2012 21:57 sinno wrote:
"conspirationist theories are uneducated sheeps" Awesome opinion you got here. Could you back it up with some facts to prove your point? Im afraid your probably lost in translation. But of course as the saying goes you dont know what you dont know.
Cause they're always based on two facts:
our world is fucking complex and scary. I mean you can be an expert on such a field as the UN and still there are so many intricacies that you don't know inside the UN based on the struggle between persons etc... understanding the process behind the decision making is simply impossible for 99% percent of the population.
the fact that you're unable to understand how your decision makers that you, directly or not, elected scares the shit out of you and you prefer a simplistic explanation (the good guys and the evil ones) which often oppose the elite and the people in order to create what seems a rational view of the world while it's simply a fallacy (the people doesn't exist but that's another problem). Nobody understands completely how our world functions, but if you're wise you admit you've no opinion and listen to those who're educated in a matter instead of scaremongerers.
But i don't blame you, you talk about individuals in IR, you're so obviously ignorant about what you're talking about it's normal that it appears as realistic theories.
|
On April 27 2012 18:28 0mar wrote:Just when you think Arizona hit rock bottom, they bust out the jackhammer and dig the rock bottom deeper. http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/26/11415282-agenda-21-arizona-close-to-passing-anti-un-sustainability-bill?liteShow nested quote +"Among the U.N. declaration’s non-binding principles are calls for sustainable development, environmental protection, eradicating poverty, eliminating unsustainable production and consumption patterns, economic growth and the participation of women in government decisions. “We wouldn’t be able to use CFL light bulbs in state buildings because that would be considered energy efficiency,” Campbell said. Campbell also said that the state’s Economic Security Department, which handles unemployment and welfare benefits, could be outlawed because it has to do with eradicating poverty. Also, Arizona universities have sustainability programs that could be banned if the bill becomes law, Campbell warned." TL;DR version: Tea party nuts propose bill that could end energy efficient policies, anti-poverty legislation, pollution-reduction, etc etc, all because they agree with UN declarations.
Anti poverty keeps people in poverty as it is subsidising the OPPOSITE of working one's way out of the gutters.
|
Arizona is totally doing this wrong. The way to deal with UN resolutions you don't like is to simply ignore them, like every country does.
|
On April 27 2012 22:03 bonifaceviii wrote:
Arizona is totally doing this wrong. The way to deal with UN resolutions you don't like is to simply ignore them, like every country does.
When they invade you it's harder to ignore them :D might happen to Arizona XD
|
On April 27 2012 22:06 sAsImre wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 22:03 bonifaceviii wrote:
Arizona is totally doing this wrong. The way to deal with UN resolutions you don't like is to simply ignore them, like every country does. When they invade you it's harder to ignore them :D might happen to Arizona XD
Solution: give Arizona a veto on the Security Council.
And just to even things out, give one to Bono too.
|
On April 27 2012 22:09 bonifaceviii wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 22:06 sAsImre wrote:On April 27 2012 22:03 bonifaceviii wrote:
Arizona is totally doing this wrong. The way to deal with UN resolutions you don't like is to simply ignore them, like every country does. When they invade you it's harder to ignore them :D might happen to Arizona XD Solution: give Arizona a veto on the Security Council. And just to even things out, give one to Bono too.
Cold war style UN inc so and everyone is happy.
|
There is no "Common Sense" in our politics...
|
Arizona - First state to prove Obamas birth certificate is fake
Arizona - First state to tell the UN to buzz off
Can you say DUHH WINNING???
I'm done trying to prove any points its obviously a waste of time. The constitution is the only thing that keeps the government from taking away our god given rights. And to say that these some how could be "out dated" is completely hilarious, so much so I actually feel bad for anyone that believes this. Your sheep getting lead to the slaughter. Study history, open a history book. The powers at be are always constriving of ways to take away our rights. To say the contrary is you having a blind eye to history.
The United Nations is a wolf in sheeps clothing. Its soldiers have slaughtered many countless innocent lives. Im ashamed that my country is apart of this.
Im studying to get my history major and if theres one thing i've learned its nothing is what it seems.
Books too read if you care to be informed on whats really going on.
" War is a racket " - Smedley Butler
"Tragedy and hope " - Carrol Quigley
And Ron Pauls: Revolution a manifesto
I strongly suggest these books to open your minds eye too the tyranny that is being perpetrated.
|
On April 27 2012 22:28 sinno wrote:
Arizona - First state to prove Obamas birth certificate is fake
Arizona - First state to tell the UN to buzz off
Can you say DUHH WINNING???
I'm done trying to prove any points its obviously a waste of time. The constitution is the only thing that keeps the government from taking away our god given rights. And to say that these some how could be "out dated" is completely hilarious, so much so I actually feel bad for anyone that believes this. Your sheep getting lead to the slaughter. Study history, open a history book. The powers at be are always constriving of ways to take away our rights. To say the contrary is you having a blind eye to history.
The United Nations is a wolf in sheeps clothing. Its soldiers have slaughtered many countless innocent lives. Im ashamed that my country is apart of this.
Im studying to get my history major and if theres one thing i've learned its nothing is what it seems.
Books too read if you care to be informed on whats really going on.
" War is a racket " - Smedley Butler
"Tragedy and hope " - Carrol Quigley
And Ron Pauls: Revolution a manifesto
I strongly suggest these books to open your minds eye too the tyranny that is being perpetrated.
Its bad for the powers to take away too many liberties, as their sheep become less productive and decrease tax revenues of the masters. Because of this the current mixed-economy is likely to stay the way it is for quite a while.
|
a tea party-backed bill that proponents say would stop a United Nations takeover conspiracy
This is in the first sentence of the source, and is also where I stopped reading.
|
On April 27 2012 22:28 sinno wrote:
Arizona - First state to prove Obamas birth certificate is fake
Arizona - First state to tell the UN to buzz off
Can you say DUHH WINNING???
I'm done trying to prove any points its obviously a waste of time. The constitution is the only thing that keeps the government from taking away our god given rights. And to say that these some how could be "out dated" is completely hilarious, so much so I actually feel bad for anyone that believes this. Your sheep getting lead to the slaughter. Study history, open a history book. The powers at be are always constriving of ways to take away our rights. To say the contrary is you having a blind eye to history.
The United Nations is a wolf in sheeps clothing. Its soldiers have slaughtered many countless innocent lives. Im ashamed that my country is apart of this.
Im studying to get my history major and if theres one thing i've learned its nothing is what it seems.
Books too read if you care to be informed on whats really going on.
" War is a racket " - Smedley Butler
"Tragedy and hope " - Carrol Quigley
And Ron Pauls: Revolution a manifesto
I strongly suggest these books to open your minds eye too the tyranny that is being perpetrated.
You realize that the people (inhabitants of the US) are what keeps the government doing what it's doing and not a piece of paper right? The people recognize the paper, and the government and that the government is legitimate as long as it acts in accordance with the paper. The paper itself is actually completely worthless without these relations to it. The government would be well in its right to make a new constitution should it be elected on that basis.
And again you have no understanding what so ever for what the UN is or what it does. It's embarassing, really. Why don't you pick up a book on it? Actually I'm going to recommend a book to you that's absolutely fantastic (I've had several others and none of them are as all encompassing yet so deep as this one): Global Politics by Andrew Heywood. It goes through how the world is currently structured, including different ways to interpret the known facts (keywords: scientifically recognized ways of interpreting known facts) and the role of international institutions, including the UN. I'm not kidding, you should pick the book up. Anyone interested in international relations or current world politics should.
|
The constitution isnt a piece of paper. Its whats written on this piece of paper which is the constitution. Words which have essentially been written in blood. And to think that people in this day and age can consider it worth washing out makes me want too puke.
Ill read your book if you promise to read mine. Question who do you think structures the current world we live in?
Do you really believe the UN is necessary? IF so what is it necessary for? Thank you for the recommended read.
|
On April 27 2012 22:28 sinno wrote:
Arizona - First state to prove Obamas birth certificate is fake
Arizona - First state to tell the UN to buzz off
Can you say DUHH WINNING???
I'm done trying to prove any points its obviously a waste of time. The constitution is the only thing that keeps the government from taking away our god given rights. And to say that these some how could be "out dated" is completely hilarious, so much so I actually feel bad for anyone that believes this. Your sheep getting lead to the slaughter. Study history, open a history book. The powers at be are always constriving of ways to take away our rights. To say the contrary is you having a blind eye to history.
The United Nations is a wolf in sheeps clothing. Its soldiers have slaughtered many countless innocent lives. Im ashamed that my country is apart of this.
Im studying to get my history major and if theres one thing i've learned its nothing is what it seems.
Books too read if you care to be informed on whats really going on.
" War is a racket " - Smedley Butler
"Tragedy and hope " - Carrol Quigley
And Ron Pauls: Revolution a manifesto
I strongly suggest these books to open your minds eye too the tyranny that is being perpetrated.
You cannot resist the consolidation. The insidious forces are too entrenched to stop the hierarchy from awakening. It will dissolve all borders, there will be no more US, let alone Arizona. And then, when the UN has secured its iron grip, and the stars are right, they will awaken Great C'thulhu from his slumber in R'yleh and the final reckoning of madness will be complete. Phn'glui mglw'nafh Chthulhu R'lyeh wagn'nagl fhtagn!
|
On April 27 2012 22:33 PassiveAce wrote:Show nested quote +a tea party-backed bill that proponents say would stop a United Nations takeover conspiracy This is in the first sentence of the source, and is also where I stopped reading.
You should read it all, if you can forget for a moment that it's, in fact, very serious, and if you like sarcastic sens of humour, it's ridiculously funny lol
|
On April 27 2012 19:03 Bill Murray wrote:
we could just give it to mexico for some burritos
This is the best damn idea I've heard all day, if you replace burritos with fajitas
|
I was going to reply to this thread but then I read everything posted by "sinno" and I think my brain melted.
I would like to say that your rights are given to you not by God, but by your government and the force your government exerts over your people. This is the same government that has the ability to veto these UN resolutions if it disagrees with them.
You cannot believe in God given rights and then claim that some organisation like your government is taking them away. If a concept as absolute and all powerful as a God gave you rights then presumably it would be able to protect them, and if you believe they were given to you by God without any intention of protecting them and preventing other people taking them away, then really what value do those rights have? Rights without force to protect them are just empty words and ideas.
Your government is the entity that gives you the rights you have and in some cases takes them away, and as a nation over the course of your history you decide who and what your government is, and thereby also decide which rights you can and cannot have in your society. If you disagree with the rights your government decides are appropriate for you, then that's fine, not everybody is going to agree with them, but it's tiring for people to constantly call conspiracy and claim their government is infringing on some inherent "God given rights" that vary greatly from person to person and have no basis in reality. Remember that the rights your government gives you are a product of your nation's history and are in general supposed to represent what your society believes is right.
Sorry if this was too off topic but too many people randomly claim things like this are some government conspiracy to take away their rights, because they want to believe they are a victim and justify things like this lashing out against the UN with badly written law in ways which will not hurt the UN at all, they will only hurt themselves.
|
United Kingdom16710 Posts
On April 27 2012 22:50 kef wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 19:03 Bill Murray wrote:
we could just give it to mexico for some burritos This is the best damn idea I've heard all day, if you replace burritos with fajitas
Agreed. Fajitas rule supreme.
|
Can we get a better OP please? Title gives zero information about what the thread is about, and there's no content in the post besides a link and two sentences.
|
I feel bad for the american people, all the shit the take is because of some stupid people in power, like the one's in Arizona.
|
On April 27 2012 22:55 Telcontar wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 22:50 kef wrote:On April 27 2012 19:03 Bill Murray wrote:
we could just give it to mexico for some burritos This is the best damn idea I've heard all day, if you replace burritos with fajitas Agreed. Fajitas rule supreme.
All the miscreants should bow in front of the Supreme Fajita and its uncontested ruling.
|
Lol, the Tea Party. They keep the bible in their back pocket, but they sure as hell have never read it
|
Part of me says let them burn their state to the ground. If it's what they want, they can do it. Meanwhile, it can be an example of the utter stupidity that is the Tea Party
|
United States22154 Posts
not enough content to be a good op, and the thread is already a mess of uninformed opinions, so I;m closing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
