Is “Social-Justice,” Justice?

(**From late 2011) Dennis Prager opines in short about how the Left changes things (in this case, “Justice”) — be hyphenating a word or core value.

“Social Justice” is a term you hear almost every day. But did you ever hear anybody define what it actually means? Jonah Goldberg of the American Enterprise Institute tries to pin this catchall phrase to the wall. In doing so, he exposes the not-so-hidden agenda of those who use it. What sounds so caring and noble turns out to be something very different.

 

Flashback: Al Gore vs Reality (11-years ago today)

CLIMATE DEPOT:

Deadlines Come and Go

Recently, in 2014, the United Nations declared a climate “tipping point” by which the world must act to avoid dangerous global warming. “The world now has a rough deadline for action on climate change. Nations need to take aggressive action in the next 15 years to cut carbon emissions, in order to forestall the worst effects of global warming, says the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,” reported the Boston Globe.

But way back in 1982, the UN had announced a two-decade tipping point for action on environmental issues. Mostafa Tolba, executive director of the UN Environment Program (UNEP), warned on May 11, 1982, that the “world faces an ecological disaster as final as nuclear war within a couple of decades unless governments act now.” According to Tolba, lack of action would bring “by the turn of the century, an environmental catastrophe which will witness devastation as complete, as irreversible as any nuclear holocaust.”

In 1989, the UN was still trying to sell that “tipping point” to the public. According to a July 5, 1989, article in the San Jose Mercury News, Noel Brown, the then-director of the New York office of UNEP was warning of a “10-year window of opportunity to solve” global warming. According to the Herald, “A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000. Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of ‘eco-refugees,’ threatening political chaos.”

But in 2007, seven years after that supposed tipping point had come and gone, Rajendra Pachauri, then the chief of the UN IPPC, declared 2012 the climate deadline by which it was imperative to act: “If there’s no action before 2012, that’s too late. What we do in the next two to three years will determine our future. This is the defining moment.”

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon announced his own deadline in August 2009, when he warned of “incalculable” suffering without a UN climate deal in December 2009. And in 2012, the UN gave Planet Earth another four-year reprieve. UN Foundation president and former U.S. Senator Tim Wirth called Obama’s re-election the “last window of opportunity” to get it right on climate change.

Heir to the British throne Prince Charles originally announced in March 2009 that we had “less than 100 months to alter our behavior before we risk catastrophic climate change.” As he said during a speech in Brazil, “We may yet be able to prevail and thereby to avoid bequeathing a poisoned chalice to our children and grandchildren. But we only have 100 months to act.”

To his credit, Charles stuck to this rigid timetable—at least initially. Four months later, in July 2009, he declared a ninety-six-month tipping point. At that time the media dutifully reported that “the heir to the throne told an audience of industrialists and environmentalists at St James’s Palace last night that he had calculated that we have just 96 months left to save the world. And in a searing indictment on capitalist society, Charles said we can no longer afford consumerism and that the ‘age of convenience’ was over.”

At the UN climate summit in Copenhagen in 2009, Charles was still keeping at it: “The grim reality is that our planet has reached a point of crisis and we have only seven years before we lose the levers of control.”

As the time expired, the Prince of Wales said in 2010, “Ladies and gentlemen we only—we now have only 86 months left before we reach the tipping point.”

By 2014, a clearly exhausted Prince Charles seemed to abandon the countdown, announcing, “We are running out of time. How many times have I found myself saying this over recent years?”

In the summer of 2017, Prince Charles’s one-hundred-month tipping point finally expired.26 What did Charles have to say? Was he giving up? Did he proclaim the end times for the planet? Far from it. Two years earlier, in 2015, Prince Charles abandoned his hundred-month countdown and gave the world a reprieve by extending his climate tipping point another thirty-five years, to the year 2050!

A July 2015 interview in the Western Morning News revealed that “His Royal Highness warns that we have just 35 years to save the planet from catastrophic climate change.” So instead of facing the expiration of his tipping point head on, the sixty-nine-year-old Charles kicked the climate doomsday deadline down the road until 2050 when he would be turning the ripe age of 102. (Given the Royal Family’s longevity, it is possible he may still be alive for his new extended deadline.)

Former Irish President Mary Robinson issued a twenty-year tipping point in 2015, claiming that global leaders have “at most two decades to save the world.”

Al Gore announced his own ten-year climate tipping point in 2006 and again in 2008, warning that “the leading experts predict that we have less than 10 years to make dramatic changes in our global warming pollution lest we lose our ability to ever recover from this environmental crisis.” In 2014, with “only two years left” before Gore’s original deadline, the climatologist Roy Spencer mocked the former vice president, saying “in the grand tradition of prophets of doom, Gore’s prognostication is not shaping up too well.”

Penn State Professor Michael Mann weighed in with a 2036 deadline. “There is an urgency to acting unlike anything we’ve seen before,” Mann explained. Media outlets reported Mann’s made a huge media splash with his prediction, noting “Global Warming Will Cross a Dangerous Threshold in 2036.”

Other global warming activists chose 2047 as their deadline, while twenty governments from around the globe chose 2030 as theirs, with Reuters reporting that millions would die by 2030 if world failed to act on climate: “More than 100 million people will die and global economic growth will be cut by 3.2% of GDP by 2030 if the world fails to tackle climate change, a report commissioned by 20 governments said on Wednesday. As global avg. temps rise due to ghg emissions, the effects on the planet, such as melting ice caps, extreme weather, drought and rising sea levels, will threaten populations and livelihoods, said the report conducted by the humanitarian organization DARA.”

As we saw in chapter five, top UK scientist Sir David King warned in 2004 that that by 2100 Antarctica could be the only habitable continent.

Tipping point rhetoric seems to have exploded beginning in 2002. An analysis by Reason magazine’s Ron Bailey found that tipping points in environmental rhetoric increased dramatically in that year…..

CNN’s Anti-Semitic Culture (BONUS: Some U.N. Antisemitism)

MEDIA’ite notes CNN’S hiring brashness:

A CNN photo editor resigned from the network Thursday after his past, vicious tweets about Jews and Israel, including posts apparently celebrating the deaths of “Jewish pigs,” were unearthed.

Arthur Schwartz, a GOP operative, first resurfaced the posts from CNN photo editor Mohammed Elshamy. He did so by tagging CNN’s Andrew Kaczynski who, with Nathan McDermott, published an ARTICLE about their own unearthing of past statements by Trump Treasury pick and former Fox News personality Monica Crowley.

Schwartz suggested CNN look in-house equally as thoroughly.

U.N. WATCH catches us up with another United Nations loony-toones story:

Hillel Neuer, Executive Director of UN Watch, condemned the delegates’ abuse of the UN body as a forum to target Israel.

“The UN reached new heights of absurdity by singling out Israel alone on women’s rights, yet saying nothing on Iran holding women’s rights lawyer Nasrin Sotoudeh behind bars, Saudi Arabia jailing and torturing women’s rights activists, and subjugating women under harsh male guardianship laws, or on Yemen denying women hospital treatment without the permission of a male relative,” Neuer said.

“When you have Iran, Saudi Arabia and Yemen among the UN council members accusing Israel of violating women’s rights, you are in the theater of the absurd.”

[….]

YES: Andorra, Angola, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Benin, Cambodia, China, Colombia, Denmark, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, France, Ghana, India, Iran, Ireland, Japan, Kenya, Luxembourg, Mali, Malta, Morocco, Netherlands, Norway, Pakistan, Paraguay, Philippines, South Korea, Russia, St. Vincent, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uruguay, Venezuela, and Yemen.

NO: United States and Canada

ABSTAIN: Brazil, Cameroon, Germany, Jamaica, Mexico, Romania, Togo, Ukraine, and United Kingdom

What Socialism and Islamism Have In Common (Via the U.N.)

Secular left and Islamic/Islamist left, united. Marxism / Socialism and Islam, are ideological brothers, both are, utopian, anti-capitalism, big state, regulate society, anti-israel, antijudaism, antichristianity, anti-individual liberty, anti-American, trans-national, wants limits of thought and speech freedom, androgyny, against marriage protection, monopolism, etc. (See more from a chapter by Melanie Phillips, HERE)

Resolution 2334: A Victory of Jihadism

A must read GATESTONE article:

  • Led astray from their primary mission, these international organizations have become tools of corruption or terrorism, reinforcing global Islamic power. Those who vote are heads of state, motivated by interests and ideologies that are often criminal, and not all of which represent the opinions of their people whom they tyrannize, including those from European “democracies”.
  • In 1948-49, Egypt seized Gaza, Syria stood their ground on the Golan, and Transjordan colonized Judea, Samaria and the Old City of Jerusalem. Their Jewish inhabitants were killed or driven out by the Arab colonists, who seized their homes and destroyed their synagogues and cemeteries. Fighting ceased on armistice and cease-fire lines, there was no peace and no international borders were recognized.
  • Europe rushed to adopt the French position in 1973 and, along with the OIC, planned political measures designed to destroy the Jewish State by denying its sovereign rights and its cantonment on an indefensible territory. Resolution 2334 is now the icing on the cake of this policy, which forms the basis for a Euro-Islamic policy to merge in all EU political and social sectors, as well as in promoting globalism and the enforcement of the UN’s supranational decision-making powers.
  • In 1967, once again, the combined armies of Egypt, Syria and Jordan invaded Israel to destroy it, but this time Israel took back all the land that had been lost in 1949, that had becomeJudenrein [free of Jews], Arabized and Islamized. These were areas from which the Palestinian Jews had been driven out, and that Europe referred to as Jewish colonies. They are called Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria.
  • No European nation protested against the Islamic colonization of Jewish-Palestinian areas, the expulsion of their Jewish inhabitants and the seizure of their belongings, or against the persecution of Jews in Arab countries.
  • An artificial Palestinian Arab “people” was created in order to replace the people of Israel. A European army of forger-historians and Arab Christian dhimmis transferred the historic characteristics of the Jews onto them. Names of towns and regions were Islamized: Jerusalem was called Al-Quds and “the West Bank” replaced Judea and Samaria.
  • Israelis, guilty of existing, were expected to apologize for that, humbly to maintain their enemies and suffer their terrorism without protesting or defending themselves. Their crime? They refused to mingle with and disappear intodhimmitude by giving up their rights and their history to the people created by the Euro-Arab alliance to replace them.
  • It is the turn of Europeans to see a replacement population be created in their countries, with all the rights that are being taken away from them. It is their turn to be forced to renounce their national, historic, cultural and religious identity, to apologize and take the blame for existing. It is their turn to be forced to monitor their borders and guard their airports, their schools, their trains, their streets and their cities with soldiers. European governments that contemplated the destruction of Israel worked together with the enemies of Israel to destroy their own people, their sovereignty, their security and their freedoms.
  • The recognition of the legitimacy of Israel’s return to its homeland is the essential condition of Islamic peace with the world, because it will abolish the jihadist ideology.

[….]

…To begin with, an artificial Palestinian Arab “people” was created in order to replace the people of Israel. A European army of forger historians and Arab Christian dhimmis [non-Muslims who have surrendered to living under Islam] transferred the historic characteristics of the Jews onto them. Made the symbol of salvation from the purported Occupation and the Colonization symbolized by Israel, the Palestinians were compared to Jesus, crucified on the cross of a supposedly “Zionist Nazism.” The French Islamophiles and anti-Zionists, Louis Massignon and Jacques Berque, were the promoters of this role-reversal between the Jewish victims of Nazism and the Nazi persecutors, assisted by their Muslim allies on the battlefields and in the extermination camps, under the guidance of the Mufti.

Names of towns and regions were Islamized: Jerusalem was called Al-Quds and the West Bank replaced Judea and Samaria. Jihad and dhimmitude became taboo words. The OIC and its satellites, including Europe, had ordered the planned elimination of Israel. No argument could hinder its condemnation and the hateful campaign, by subverting words and language, that justified it. There was no point in pleading. Neither truth nor morality would change this verdict: Israel was the cause of the war, the terrorist attacks, injustice, all the evils suffered by the Islamic world and Europe, victims of jihadist terrorism – which it attributed to the existence of Israel. The fight to eliminate Israel was referred to as a just cause, a fight for peace.

The Euro-Arab alliance did its best to criminalize the Israelis for having restored their State to their historic homeland. The Israelis’ national sovereignty, their cultural and historic roots, their survival, their successes and spectacular military victories earned them reproaches and denigration. Reinvigorated by Palestinian hatred, the post–war Nazi-Islamic alliance did its best to neutralize the success of the Jewish State on a political level, to make sure it remained unstable and insecure. Endlessly harassed by European governments and their armies of dhimmis, the Israelis, guilty of existing, were shamed for it, forced to apologize for it, and expected humbly to maintain their enemies and suffer their terrorism without protesting or defending themselves. Their crime? They refused to mingle with and disappear into dhimmitude by giving up their rights and their history to the people created by the Euro-Arab alliance (Eurabia) to replace them.

The PLO was the jihadist arm of the Ummah [the Islamic community], the embodiment of its theological ideology which justified Islamic expansion and its appropriation of all spaces, while wiping out the previous cultures and people, imposing its law, its customs and its beliefs everywhere.

Heads of state, European ministers, the clergy, dhimmi Christians who had become its courtiers, offered it their help, more than happy to collect its gold, while sweeping away the debris of people and history before its feet, obstacles to its progress as they finally managed to rid it of Israel. And – so they believed – they would rid them of nothing but Israel, and thereby achieve a Holocaust that began in Europe so that at last a world, a humanity, would emerge, without Israel. The dream of Hitler and the Mufti would be realized.

The European governments, allies of the Palestinian anti-Israeli terrorists, whom they called a “just cause” – thus feeding them spiritually and funding them – believed that they were safe. But guess what? This Ummah policy against Israel, actively supported by its European and dhimmi courtiers, was unleashed against the people of Europe. Did terrorists attack Israelis during their festivities? Now it is the Europeans who have to celebrate their festivities protected by an army of soldiers. It is the Europeans’ turn to see a replacement population being created in their own countries, with all the rights that are now being taken away from them. It is the Europeans’ turn to be forced to renounce their national, historic, cultural and religious identity, to apologize and take the blame for existing as they are. It is the Europeans’ turn to be forced to monitor their borders and guard their airports, their schools, their trains, their streets and their cities with soldiers. Ironically, the European governments that contemplated the destruction of Israel worked together with the enemies of Israel to destroy their own people, their own sovereignty, their own security and their own freedoms. The OIC pandered to their unconfessed hatred of Israel, blinding them with its gold and unwaveringly led the cowards and the fainthearted, under the whip of terrorism, towards dishonor and oblivion.

Resolution 2334 is the culmination of this policy, but it is not the last chapter of the story. Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Libya no longer exist, Egypt is scarcely hanging on. In its cauldron, jihad is burning Muslims who once dreamed of carrying it out against Jews and Christians. Arab dhimmi clergy and intellectuals, who inspired the Euro-Arab alliance against Israel and the Palestinian falsification, are seeing their communities decimated by their own lies. In a ruined Europe, butchered by hostile “sectarians,” the people are rising up to send the zealous servants of the OIC to the scrap heap of history. Worried about popular anger, ministers no longer dare to lie and are forced to recognize jihadism and blame the terrorism on it instead of on Israel….

Obama Despises Israel Because He Despises the West

In this audio from late in December 2016, Ben Shapiro on the “Morning Answer” discusses the United States abstention in the vote against Israel in the United Nations. He notes Obama’s history — along with the rest of the crew — of disliking the Judeo-Christian freedoms in this country. A good clip to remember by Ben.

Here are a couple articles by Ben:

A Complete Timeline of Obama’s Anti-Israel Hatred || March 2015;
Happy Chanukah, From Obama: Obama-Backed UN Resolution Says Temple Mount Isn’t Jewish || December 2016;
Obama Despises Israel Because He Despises the West || December 2016.

Declaring War on Judeo-Christian Civilization

See other Prager University insights:

The officials said that business with the embassies of those countries — Britain, France, Russia, China, Japan, Ukraine, Angola, Egypt, Uruguay, Spain, Senegal and New Zealand — will be suspended… (CNN)

Here is an excellent article by GATESTONE on the issue of the United Nations trying to undermine the Judeo-Christian West:

✦ How is it that Western jurisprudence, created after the Second World War to prevent more crimes against humanity, is now being used to perpetuate more crimes and against democracies?

✦ It is a dreadful manipulation to try erase all Jewish and Christian history, to make believe that all the world was originally and forever only Islamic. That is what a jihad looks like. It is not just orange jumpsuits, beheadings and slavery. If one can erase and rewrite history, one can redirect the future.

✦ If Palestinian men beat their wives, it’s Israel’s fault, argued UN expert Dubravka Simonovic with a straight face.

✦ Last month, the President of the UN General Assembly sported the famous keffiyah scarf, a symbol of the “Palestinian resistance” (read terrorism). This is simply the continuation of the cultural obliteration of Israel, which is supposed to justify next its physical obliteration.

✦ The UN’s war on the Israel’s Jews is, at heart, a war against the West. The UN and its backers are briskly paving the way for the European Caliphate.

2016 has been a sumptuous year for the anti-Semites at the United Nations. The UN Security Council just targeted the only democracy in the Middle East: the State of Israel. The outgoing Obama Administration reportedly orchestrated what even Haaretz called a “hit and run” campaign in UN to denigrate the Jewish State and leave it to a fate where only conflict and hate loom. This is a cultural genocide that is no less dangerous than terror attacks. It is based on anti-Semitic lies and creates the atmosphere not for achieving “peace”, as disingenuously claimed, but for perpetuating war.

UNSC Resolution 2334 is the culmination of a dizzyingly fruitful year for anti-Semites. Last November, committees of the UN General Assembly in a single day adopted 10 resolutions against Israel, the only open society in the Middle East. How many resolutions have been approved against Syria? One. How many against the rogue state of North Korea? One. How many against Russia when it annexed Crimea? One.

Hillel Neuer, of UN Watch, observed:

“Even as Syrian president Bashar Assad is preparing for the final massacre of his own people in Aleppo, the U.N. adopted a resolution — drafted and co-sponsored by Syria — which falsely condemns Israel for “repressive measures” against Syrian citizens on the Golan Heights. It’s obscene.”

Not a single resolution was approved for those states which really abuse human rights, such as Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Venezuela, China or Cuba, not to mention many virtual tyrannies throughout Africa. Only one resolution was approved for the “Palestinian refugee properties”, but not even a single mention for the property of the Iraqi Christians in Mosul.

Another resolution in this racist banquet of the United Nations concerned the “application of the Geneva Convention in the occupied territories”. There are hundreds of territorial disputes in the world, from Tibet to Cyprus, but only Israel deserves to be called out?

According to the liars at the United Nations, the most evil country in the world is Israel. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Zeid Ra’ad, and Jordan’s Prince Zeid al Hussein are sponsoring even now a “blacklist” of international companies that have ties with Israeli companies in Judea, Samaria, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, to facilitate boycotting Israel in the evident hope of economically exterminating the only democracy and pluralistic nation in the region: the Jewish State.

The UN Envoy for Children and Armed Conflict, Leila Zerrougui of Algeria, suggested also including the Israeli army in the blacklist of countries and groups that regularly cause harm to children, along with Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, the Islamic State, the Taliban, and countries such as the Congo and the Central African Republic, infamous for their child-soldiers — but of course not the Palestinians, who continue to promote using children as combatants and children as “martyrs“. How is it that Western jurisprudence, created after the Second World War to prevent more crimes against humanity, is now being used to perpetuate more crimes and against democracies?

The UN women’s rights commission condemned Israel as the world’s only violator of women’s rights. Not Syria, where Assad’s forces use rape as a tactic of war, or the Islamic State, which enslaves women from religious minorities. Not Saudi Arabia, where women are punished if they do not wear the Islamic full-covering clothing in scorching temperatures, or drive a car or even leave the house. Not Iran, where “adultery” (which can include being raped) is punishable by being stoned to death. And if Palestinian men beat their wives, it’s Israel’s fault, argued UN expert Dubravka Simonovic with a straight face.

The UN’s World Health Organization also singled out Israel as the only violator in the world of “mental, physical and environmental health”, despite Israel being the only state in the world actually to give medical care to its enemies (ask Hamas leaders’ children).

Canadian law professor Michael Lynk was then appointed as the UN’s “impartial” investigator of alleged Israeli human rights violations despite his long record of anti-Israel lobbying, including his board membership on many pro-Palestinian organizations, including Friends of Sabeel and the National Council on Canada-Arab Relations.

Last October, the UN cultural agency, UNESCO — by magically declaring ancient Biblical Jewish sites “Islamic”, even though Islam did not historically exist until the seventh century, hundreds of years later — pretended, with the villainous complicity of the West, to erase the Jewish-Christian roots of Jerusalem.

It is a dreadful manipulation to try erase all Jewish and Christian history, to make believe that all the world was originally and forever only Islamic. It is a jihad. That is what a jihad looks like. It is not just orange jumpsuits, beheadings and slavery. If one can erase and rewrite history, one can redirect the future. If you do not know where you are coming from, what values will you defend or fight for?….

(read it all)

The United Nations Homogenizes Opinion

Ezra Levant of TheRebel.media on the UN’s blacklisting of Rebel journalists who applied to cover the COP22 climate conference in Morroco. MORE: http://www.LetUsReport.com

Some news via GAYPATRIOT:

…Bowing at the altar of Gaia comes with a significant cost. In Ontario, the province where the Gaia Agenda has been pushed to California-style extremes — energy rates have skyrocketed. And now many Canucks are finding themselves having to choose between having back-bacon in the fridge and heating their homes.

Ontario premiers Dalton McGuinty and Kathleen Wynne, via their 2009 Green Energy Act and other poor decisions, have pushed many of the people they govern into dire financial straits thanks to their activist agendas.

“They live as if it’s Cold War Russia,” Miranda from Toronto told me during a phone conversation about her parent’s energy woes. “They use a pellet stove and propane heating. They put construction-style plastic on the windows and extra insulation.”

“They’re considering using food banks this winter,” she said. “I work in international development in third world countries and I’m starting to see the stuff here that I’m seeing there.”

Not everybody is doing so bad. Canada’s Carbon Tax “Slush Fund” promises to become a big, fat gold mine for politically connected cronies and rent-seekers.

Play Socialist Games, Win Socialist Prizes….

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s U.N. Speech (2015)

October 1st, 2015 • Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu renewed his warning that the Iranian nuclear deal threatens to destabilize the Middle East and will make a war more likely. He cautioned that already Iran is ramping up efforts to fund terror cells worldwide, while also arming Islamists in Syria, Yemen, Lebanon, and the Palestinian territories.

The Real Goals of Climate Change and the Left

Some of what Bill Nye said in the above video from Campus Reform:

“We need, dare I say it, a tax, or should I say a fee,” Nye purportedly said Wednesday, right before an anonymous student began recording.

“It’s not just to be mean, it’s to redistribute wealth,” Nye said.

Nye went on to claim that instituting such a tax would drive innovation in more environmentally friendly ways. 

“It will stimulate people investing in more energy efficient means. If you gotta pay a fee every time you make carbon monoxie and somone comes up with a more efficient car, you’ll use that car. Somebody comes up with a more efficient blender, you’ll use that blender. I mean, that’s just how it’s going to go.”

[….]

“The trouble with this is, there are people now, in the U.S. government, who don’t like government,” Nye lectured.

The former television host and Disney actor then ranted about limited government conservatives, comparing them to a General Motors employee that wants to shut their own company down.

“We have to get people who really want the government to do what it’s supposed to do, which is run things,” Nye said.

A student who attended the event told Campus Reform that he was disappointed with the big government push offered by Nye. “I thought this was going to be a fantastic event talking about science, but it turned out to be politically charged, big government propaganda.”

“I think he should stick to T.V.”…..

Via CNS-News, admitted goals, “UN’s Top Climate Official: Goal Is To ‘Intentionally Transform the Economic Development Model’”:

The United Nations’ top climate change official says the U.N.’s goal is to “intentionally transform the economic development model” in place “since the Industrial Revolution.”

“This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model, for the first time in human history,”Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) said February 3rd during a press conference in Brussels.

“This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution….

Fox News also notes that U.N. ‘Climate Change’ Plan would likely shift trillions to form new world economy:

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

It’s an Orwellian World We Live In ~ Pro-Life Arguments = Torture

First Things has a quick synopsis of the issue, then we will delve into National Review Online’s follow-up:

U.N. experts in Geneva were at it again last week telling the Holy See that Catholic teaching on abortion is a human rights abuse, revealing a chasm between the Church’s understanding of its mission and how U.N. officials perceive it. The episode is reminiscent of a time in history when secular leaders did not accept a separation of Church and State.

The American on the U.N. Committee Against Torture, Felice Gaer, told the Holy See that the Church’s position on abortion was a “concern” and that “women should have a right to choose.” Prohibitions on abortion are a form of torture according to Gaer—who ironically spent a decade on the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom.

An expert from the country of Georgia tried to be nuanced, and accused the Catholic Church of having “publically shamed” women and doctors who commit abortions through excommunication, thereby torturing them….

(First Things)

The Catholic Church it Has No Right to Oppose Abortion ~ U.N.

When the committee met in Geneva on Monday [video] for a hearing on the Vatican’s compliance with the Convention Against Torture, Vice Chairperson Felice Gaer, an American, said in her opening statement that laws that ban all abortion—which is the position of the Catholic Church–may violate the convention. She also repeated verbatim some language that had been in a letter the CRR had sent to the committee on April 11.

Gaer, however, did not quote the section in CRR’s letter that urged the committee to tell the church that the freedoms of religion and speech did not give the church a right to advocate against abortion.

CRR’s letter included several recommendations for how the Committee Against Torture should deal with Catholicism.

CRR recommended: “Urge the Holy See to refrain from negatively interfering publicly or privately in women’s or legislators’ decisions concerning access to abortion and to support states as they attempt to align their policies on women’s reproductive rights with their obligations under the convention.”

CRR also recommended that in its upcoming report on the Vatican’s compliance with the Convention Against Torture, the committee should: “Note that the Holy See’s actions are a violation of Articles 1, 2 and 16 of the Convention Against Torture and that the rights of freedom of speech and of religion extend only so far as they do not undermine women’s reproductive rights.”

(CNS News)

Now for NRO’s excellent warning:

Kathryn has been covering the ongoing effort by radical pro-abortion NGOs to apply the U.N. Convention against Torture to the Catholic Church for — among other things — its international pro-life advocacy. The argument is so facially irrational that one would be tempted to dismiss it out of hand. Not even the U.N. could be so blindly malicious and ideological that it would attempt to destroy the church’s rights of free speech and religious liberty for the sake of protecting abortion-on-demand, could it?

Moreover, even if the U.N. Committee against Torture moved against the Vatican, such an action would be irrelevant to American courts and American constitutional law, wouldn’t it?

In fact, there is cause for concern. To be clear, the effort by the Center for Reproductive Rights clearly and explicitly targets the church’s rights to free speech and religious liberty. Here’s an excerpt from its recommendations to the Committee:

Note that the Holy See has negatively interfered with states’ attempts to develop legislation on abortion that would have served to better protect women from torture or ill-treatment. Note that the Holy See’s actions are a violation of Articles 1, 2, and 16 of the Convention against Torture and that the rights of freedom of speech and of religion extend only so far as they do not undermine women’s reproductive rights, including the right to be free from torture or ill-treatment. (Emphasis added.)

This is an astonishing statement, one that clearly targets the Catholic Church’s pro-life advocacy, equating it with state-sanctioned “torture or ill-treatment” of women and girls. By equating advocacy with torture, the Committee could begin an international legal process that would cause the U.N. to review statements or actions by pro-life public officials as “torture” within the meaning of the Convention. Radical pro-abortion groups would file amicus briefs citing new international legal standards equating pro-life advocacy with torture, thus claiming such advocacy is beyond the protection of the First Amendment. Indeed, the argument would be simple (and chilling): By permitting unfettered pro-life advocacy — by public officials and private citizens — the United States would be in violation of international law, specifically by torturing its own citizens.

[….]

It’s difficult to overstate the perversity of the abortion lobby’s U.N. argument. There are few acts more barbaric than abortion, and the very idea that such barbarism can be insulated even from criticism insults the very notion of free speech and obliterates religious liberty. This is a dramatic escalation of the already-overwrought “war against women” rhetoric, and one that would lead to such absurd results as domestic “women’s groups” accusing conservative candidates of literally torturing voters with pro-life arguments.

…read it all…

Dennis Prager on Iran`s Election to the U.N. Commission on Women`s Rights (Plus, Top-Ten 2013 UN Decisions)

Posted for categorizing on my blog:

The following is from U.N. Watch:

The Top 10 worst decisions by the U.N. in 2013 — UN Watch

1. The UN Human Rights Council elected Hezbollah supporter Jean Ziegler, founder and recipient of the Muammar Qaddafi Human Rights Prize, as a top advisor.

2. The UN General Assembly adopted 21 condemnatory resolutions against Israel, compared to 4 on the rest of the world combined.

3. The same UN General Assembly elected China, Cuba, Russia, and Saudi Arabia to the UN Human Rights Council. The dictatorships will take their new seats on January 1, 2014.

4. UN Human Rights Council expert Richard Falk blamed the Boston Marathon terror bombings on “the American global domination project” and “Tel Aviv.” Council members praised Falk and the president defended him.

5. The UN Special Committee on Decolonization, charged with upholding fundamental human rights and opposing the subjugation of peoples, elected the murderous Syrian regime to a senior post.

6. The UN Conference on Disarmament in May 2013 made Iran its president.  

7. The UN Economic and Social Council, which oversees the UN women’s rights commission, elected genocidal Sudan as its vice-president.  

8. The UN Human Rights Council elected slave-holding Mauritania to be its vice-president.

9. The UN chose Zimbabwe, a regime that systematically violates human rights, to host its world tourism summit.

10. UNESCO, which condemned no other country but Israel, and which was silent as Hamas bulldozed a world heritage site to make a terrorist training camp, allowed Syria to sit as a judge on UNESCO’s human rights committee.