The United Nations has disgraced itself immeasurably over the past month or so.
In case you missed the following stories, I suggest catching up now:
The UN’s “Sustainable Development Agenda” is Basically a Giant Corporatist Fraud
Not a Joke – Saudi Arabia Chosen to Head UN Human Rights Panel
Fresh off the scene from those two epic embarrassments, the UN now wants to tell governments of the world how to censor the internet. I wish I was kidding.
From the Washington Post:
On Thursday, the organization’s Broadband Commission for Digital Development released a damning “world-wide wake-up call” on what it calls “cyber VAWG,” or violence against women and girls. The report concludes that online harassment is “a problem of pandemic proportion” — which, nbd, we’ve all heard before.
But the United Nations then goes on to propose radical, proactive policy changes for both governments and social networks, effectively projecting a whole new vision for how the Internet could work.
Under U.S. law — the law that, not coincidentally, governs most of the world’s largest online platforms — intermediaries such as Twitter and Facebook generally can’t be held responsible for what people do on them. But the United Nations proposes both that social networks proactively police every profile and post, and that government agencies only “license” those who agree to do so.
People are being harassed online, and the solution is to censor everything and license speech? Remarkable.
How that would actually work, we don’t know; the report is light on concrete, actionable policy. But it repeatedly suggests both that social networks need to opt-in to stronger anti-harassment regimes and that governments need to enforce them proactively.
At one point toward the end of the paper, the U.N. panel concludes that “political and governmental bodies need to use their licensing prerogative” to better protect human and women’s rights, only granting licenses to “those Telecoms and search engines” that “supervise content and its dissemination.”
So we’re supposed to be lectured about human rights from an organization that named Saudi Arabia head of its human rights panel? Got it.
Regardless of whether you think those are worthwhile ends, the implications are huge: It’s an attempt to transform the Web from a libertarian free-for-all to some kind of enforced social commons.
This U.N. report gets us no closer, alas: all but its most modest proposals are unfeasible. We can educate people about gender violence or teach “digital citizenship” in schools, but persuading social networks to police everything their users post is next to impossible. And even if it weren’t, there are serious implications for innovation and speech: According to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, CDA 230 — the law that exempts online intermediaries from this kind of policing — is basically what allowed modern social networks (and blogs, and comments, and forums, etc.) to come into being.
If we’re lucky, perhaps the Saudi religious police chief (yes, they have one) who went on a rampage against Twitter a couple of years ago, will be available to head up the project.
What a joke.
Pope Lays Out Global Marxist Agenda
September 25, 2015 By Cliff Kincaid
Socialist Bernie Sanders (I-VT) is ecstatic over the pope’s address to Congress. In a message to his supporters, titled, “Why we must listen to Pope Francis,” he was particularly pleased with the fact that in his address to Congress, “Pope Francis spoke of Dorothy Day, who was a tireless advocate for the impoverished and working people in America. I think it was extraordinary that he cited her as one of the most important people in recent American history.” Day was a Marxist apologist for socialism and communist regimes. We covered this territory in my column, “With Pope’s Help, U.N. Bypasses Congress on Global Socialism.”
With Republican congressional leaders under fire from conservatives for cowering in the face of a Democratic Party onslaught, all that they needed was to roll out the welcome mat for a Marxist pope who would put them further on the defensive. But that’s exactly what happened.
Phyllis Bennis of the Marxist Institute for Policy Studies was right: “Pope Francis’ address to Congress was almost certainly not what John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, and other congressional leaders had in mind when they invited the pope to speak.” Speaking for many on the left, including the pro-abortion lobby, she said, “His clear call to end the death penalty was the only example he gave of protecting the sanctity of life: Even amid a raging congressional debate over Planned Parenthood, he never mentioned abortion.”
The list of left-wing causes in the pope’s address was extensive. Bennis noted “his calls to protect the rights of immigrants and refugees, end the death penalty, preserve the planet from the ravages of climate change, and defend the poor and dispossessed.” And then there was the attack on the policies of peace through strength, which keep us free. “Being at the service of dialogue and peace also means being truly determined to minimize and, in the long term, to end the many armed conflicts throughout our world,” the pope said. He then asked, “Why are deadly weapons being sold to those who plan to inflict untold suffering on individuals and society?”
He should ask that of Vladimir Putin.
Most Americans understand the rationale for legal immigrants. But illegal aliens who commit crimes are something else. The pope seems not to recognize a difference.
The death penalty is a punishment reserved for heinous killers. But he doesn’t mention abortion, which has taken tens of millions of innocent lives. This seemed strange to conservative Catholics, who are starting to come to grips with the fact that this is a “progressive” pope, who is not hostile toward what anti-communist Pope John Paul II called the “culture of death” through population control and reduction.
Francis’s answer on the arms control issue was to challenge the United States alone and blame its spending on national defense on monetary motives. “Sadly, the answer, as we all know, is simply for money: money that is drenched in blood, often innocent blood,” said the pope. “In the face of this shameful and culpable silence, it is our duty to confront the problem and to stop the arms trade.”
That’s a slander of our brave fighting men and women, many of whom have given their lives or sacrificed their limbs to bring freedom to people around the word, especially Muslims in such places as Iraq and Afghanistan.
Against the global Jihad, what does the pope expect the U.S. to do? Disarm?
Praising “his uniquely progressive papal perspective,” far-left radio host Amy Goodman noted that “The pope has been frank in his criticism of much of the core of U.S. society: capitalism, consumerism, war and the failure to confront climate change.” This is a fraud, of course. They used to warn us against global cooling. It then became global warming and now climate change. The cause always changes until they find something to lure people into schemes for bigger government and higher taxes.
Recognizing the socialism of the pope, Al Jazeera posted an article, “Bernie Sanders, the pope and the moral imperative of systemic change,” by Gar Alperovitz, the co-chair with James Gustave Speth of The Next System Project. Speth, former administrator of the United Nations Development Program, put his name on its 1994 “Human Development Report,” which openly promoted global taxes for world government.
The “Next System” is another name for the replacement of global capitalism by global socialism.
Those endorsing this project, in addition to Alperovitz and Speth, include:
Jane Mansbridge, Harvard University
Gerald Hudson, Service Employees International Union
Annie Leonard, Greenpeace USA
Robert B. Reich, University of California at Berkeley
Dean Baker, Center for Economic and Policy Research
Barbara Ehrenreich, Author
Jeffrey D. Sachs, Columbia University
Gerald Torres, Cornell University Law School
Larry Cohen, Communications Workers of America
Julie Matthaei, Cornerstone Cohousing
Leo Gerard, United Steelworkers
John James Conyers, Jr., 13th District, Michigan
Bill McKibben, 350.org
Saskia Sassen, Columbia University
Frances Fox Piven, City University of New York
Manuel Pastor, University of Southern California
Phillip Thompson, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Oliver Stone, Academy Award-winning Filmmaker
Medea Benjamin, CODEPINK
Timothy E. Wirth, United Nations Foundation and Better World Fund
Sarita Gupta, Jobs With Justice
Noam Chomsky, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Van Jones, The Dream Corps & Rebuild The Dream
Lawrence Mishel, Economic Policy Institute
Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz, California State University
Daniel Ellsberg, Author
Herman E. Daly, University of Maryland
Ralph Nader, Consumer Advocate, Author, Former Presidential Candidate
Ai-jen Poo, National Domestic Workers Alliance
Anna Galland, MoveOn.org Civic Action
Danny Glover, Actor, Social Activist
Tom Morello, Musician, Activist
Jill Stein, 2012 Green Party Presidential Nominee
Nancy Fraser, New School for Social Research
“We have fundamental problems because of fundamental flaws in our economic and political system,” the New Project proclaims. “The crisis now unfolding in so many ways across our country amounts to a systemic crisis. Today’s political economic system is not programmed to secure the wellbeing of people, place and planet. Instead, its priorities are corporate profits, the growth of GDP, and the projection of national power.”
The group goes on, “Large-scale system change is needed but has until recently been constrained by a continuing lack of imagination concerning social, economic and political alternatives. There are alternatives that can lead to the systemic change we need.”
Yes there are. They are called socialism and communism. But they would rather call it “sustainable development,” in order to confuse people about how the American way of life is being targeted for extinction.
Trying To Forcibly Convert USA to Communism Pope Praised Two Communists at Congress
Thomas Merton, Dorothy Day and the lies of the communist pope
September 25, 2015 by Leo Lyon Zagami
During Pope Francis’ address to Congress in joint session, four names were given by the pontiff as examples of honorable American people. The first two are well-known, Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King Jr, but most people aren’t familiar with the other two, Thomas Merton and Dorothy Day. Most would be shocked at the real truth behind this subtle stunt by the Jesuit Pope to promote his Marxist agenda.
Basically, Pope Francis is attempting what the Soviet Union could not manage to pull off in the past, and that’s to forcibly convert the US to Communist ideology.
The United States’ largest lay-run apostolates, called Catholic Answers, whose mission statement is to “help good Catholics become better Catholics,” describes Thomas Merton (1915–1968), as a womanizer, and member of the Young Communist League. Thomas Merton also fathered a child, (he was a Trappist monk, but some people also describe him as a Zen Buddhist.)
In the last year of his life, he wrote in his journal while traveling through Asia:
Last night I dreamed I was, temporarily, back at Gethsemani. I was dressed in a Buddhist monk’s habit, but with more black and red and gold, a “Zen habit,” in color more Tibetan than Zen . . . I met some women in the corridor, visitors and students of Asian religion, to whom I was explaining I was a kind of Zen monk and Gelugpa together, when I woke up. (Asian Journal, 107)
Let me remind you that Merton is supposed to be a Catholic monk not a Zen Buddhist, but Pope Francis believes that we should all honor that added value in his One World Religion set up. In fact, he did not mention Jesus once in his speech to Congress, but he mentioned Moses, who is recognized as Prophet by all three Abrahamic religions.
Pope Francis’ other choice, Dorothy Day, does not seem to be any better. David Ripe for the Catholic Media Coalition wrote this about Dorothy Day in 2012, when the American bishops unanimously backed the advancement of the cause of Dorothy Day through the process leading to sainthood:
“while she has the unanimous support of the bishops, Day is a controversial figure among many rank and file Catholics who do not consider her an acceptable role model. For them, she exemplifies the archetypal “liberal Catholic” or “social justice Catholic.” These terms refer to individuals who are often disposed to try to change the Church in various ways and who are strongly animated and influenced by left-leaning political ideology. Many such Catholics became emboldened following Vatican II and made chimerical interpretations of its documents. Chief among the objections to Day’s nomination for sainthood is the belief that she embraced the doctrines of Marxism and made them the framework of her social activism.”
David Ripe added, citing the well documented research of other sources that clearly demonstrates how traditional Catholics, the same ones who are now beginning to oppose Pope Francis in growing numbers, perceive Dorothy Day:
“Carol Byrne, a British researcher, has investigated Day’s life extensively and has chronicled her activities and writings, along with those of Peter Maurin, in The Catholic Worker Movement, 1933-1980: A Critical Analysis (AuthorHouse UK Ltd.). While Day’s defenders insist that she fully disavowed Marxism after her conversion to Catholicism, Byrne’s research leads her to conclude otherwise.”
So having analyzed who Dorothy Day and Thomas Merton really are, could the church be close to another schism? In Rome today, as I am writing this, it appears to be a growing concern amongst many traditional Catholics that don’t accept a church full of compromises and hypocrisy like the church now proposed by Pope Francis.
Even CNN religion Editor Daniel Burke wrote that “abortion and same-sex marriage received scant mention in the Pope’s short address. Instead Francis — the first pontiff to address Congress and the first from Latin America — focused on immigration, the death penalty, racial injustice, the weapons trade, and poverty”.
Are we going to listen to the Pope, and limit our gun rights, or discuss the death penalty, when the growing immigration and the refugee crisis will most likely escalate crime?
In Europe and countries like Italy, crime is reaching levels never touched before, and the unarmed population is being raped and murdered daily by so called refugees or immigrants, causing growing concern amongst the population.
In Sicily at the end of August, two senior citizens of Spanish origin, Vincenzo Solano and Mercedes Ibanez, were brutally killed by a refugee from the Ivory Coast, living in a refugee center nearby, who after cutting the throat of the husband, even raped the poor old woman before throwing her off the balcony. This case outraged Italy, but Pope Francis has said nothing about it. Instead he went on with his criminal plan to convince all of Europe and the US to give up their rights to the millions of incoming refugees and immigrants, and to force the US to give up their just right to carry guns and defend themselves from this emerging chaos.
The Holy See delegation to the United Nations has issued a Position Statement on the Outcome document of the United Nations Summit for the adoption of the post-2015 development agenda, “Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.” The Statement states the agenda is a “clear sign” that the international community has come together to eradicate poverty, and will work to ensure that all people will have the conditions necessary to live in freedom and dignity. Really?
On the morning of the 25th of September at 8:30 am ET, Fox News blatantly admitted that, “Pope Francis would be giving his marching orders to the UN,” We must oppose this whole charade, before we all lose our rights and our freedom. Stand up before it’s too late, now is the time!
Leo Lyon Zagami is an Italian-based geopolitical researcher and the author of nine books, including his latest book Pope Francis: The Last Pope? which reveals the money, Masonry and occultism behind the decline of the Catholic Church.
Related previous post on this blog