( Tea Party ) Group wants anti-U.N. item on ballot

Source: The Spokesman-Review

Spokane Patriots also targets climate policies

Spokane leaders would have to revoke the city’s memberships and relationships with the United Nations and other groups “undermining United States sovereignty” under a proposal that supporters hope will make the November ballot.

That charter amendment and another that were submitted last week would also prevent the city from “adopting any regulations, taxation or other policies which would be targeted specifically towards modifying greenhouse gas emissions.” The proposals were submitted last week by former City Council candidate Mike Fagan on behalf of the Spokane Patriots.

The Spokane Patriots is a group formed earlier this year and is an offshoot of the Tea Party of Spokane. Fagan, a member, ran for City Council last year and works for anti-tax activist Tim Eyman.

The Patriots’ U.N. proposal also would prevent the city from belonging to ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability, a group focused on climate change policy. ICLEI is an acronym of the group’s former title, the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives.


Read more: http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/apr/15/group-wants-anti-un-item-on-ballot/

...and lead them gently away.

amazedly,
Bright

Tapioca Eaters Alliance?

And they're coming for Spokane.

I hope the Spokane Patriots will vote to remove Fluoride from our water before the Nazi's come down from their moon base to enslave us!

I wonder how many people in Spokane actually buy this anti-UN tinhat thought?

agreements? They surely undermine "United States sovereignty" as well. Most international agreements "undermine" a country's "sovereignty" because it agrees to act in certain ways thus limiting its "sovereign" right to act however it wants.

It must be nice for the baggers to dream of a world where everything stops at our borders. Nothing that happens anywhere else can affect Americans. "Just make the world go away."

It was called GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) when FDR and Truman pushed it as a post-war mechanism to revive world trade after the tariff wars (Smoot-Hawley and others) of the 1930's and WWII. FDR and Truman thought GATT (and the trade it facilitated) was a good way to help rebuild economies destroyed by the war and to make future wars less likely - believing that countries that trade with each other are less likely to go to war with each other. Undoubtedly they were influenced by the tariff and trade wars that were prevalent in the years leading up to WWII.

The WTO replaced GATT in 1995.

You're right. NAFTA and GATT/WTO do represent some diminution of our "sovereignty" as does any international agreement (like the UN or climate agreements). When your country agrees to do something (or not to do something) in exchange for other countries living up to their commitments, you do lose some "sovereignty". That doesn't mean that all international agreements are bad (I'm glad the UN exists and hope that a binding climate treaty can be negotiated) - just that the pluses and minuses of each international agreement are more important than the sovereignty issue.

who believed the Bush cartel's pretext for invading and occupying Iraq was Iraq's violation of U.N. Resolution 1441? So when it comes to starting an illegal immoral war the wing nuts cite the U.N., but when it comes to leaving the earth in better condition than how we inherited it the U.N. is some kind of communist plot. These people are nuckin futz.

:mad:

When do we stop this? When do our leaders start saying "enough!" with this crap? When do we start calling this what it is -- mass hysteria/insanity??