Quiet Voices Crushing “The Dictator’s Club”

Katie Kieffer Posted: Mar 20, 2017 12:01 AM
...
The Dictators Club

Over time, the U.N. has gained the nickname The Dictator’s Club for its membership inclusion of regimes and dictatorships and for ongoing scandals including child rape by official U.N. peacekeepers. Recently, the U.N. began pushing U.N. Agenda 2030 or “Declaration of Interdependence” to combine the countries of the world into one group controlled by a handful of potentates.

Thomson Reuters Foundation editor-in-chief Belinda Goldsmith puts the cost of implementing Agenda 2030 at $172.5 trillion. (Turns out international coercion ain’t cheap.) Agenda 2030 calls for replacing nationalism with globalism to the extent that: “All countries and all stakeholders, acting in collaborative partnership, will implement this plan,” adopt “shared” wealth; and require “all learners” to embrace common definitions of “cultural diversity,” “gender equality” and “global citizenship.”
...

townhall.com...

Populism has become very "popular", not only in the U.S., it has also found it's way in the hearts of the French. Many people around the world are realizing that the "multiculturalism", and "global citizenship" that world leaders want to implement is not in the best interest of the people.

The U.N. has gained the name "The Dictatorship Club", because despite the fact that the U.N. prides itself to be in favor of human rights, many of it's member states are dictatorships and have horrible human rights violations.

Meanwhile the U.N. and the rest of the globalists have been blaming the west for all the problems in the world, they have turned a blind eye to the oppression and human rights violations that exists in many U.N. member states.

The U.N. and globalists like Soros want the entire world controlled by one small group of elitists who are using "multiculturalism" as a tool to lower the standard of living in western nations, and redistribute the wealth of western nations which would only end up enriching and giving all power to globalists like Soros.

In fact the U.N. and the globalists have gone on the offensive proclaiming that "populism is a threat" to the U.N. goals for a One World Government.

UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein warned the Human Rights Council of rising populism and government authoritarianism in the face of current security threats, calling on delegates to protect the rights-based multilateral system.

OHCHR launched its highest-ever appeal for extra-budgetary funds, seeking US$253 million for its 2017 work programme, which aims to contribute to the sound governance of migration and advance implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
...

sdg.iisd.org...

The U.S. is the country that has given the most money to this corrupt world group known as the U.N.

U.S. Funding of the United Nations Reaches All-Time High
August 13, 2010
...
U.S. Funding of the U.N. System

The U.S. has been the largest financial supporter of the U.N. since the organization’s founding in 1945. The U.S. is currently assessed 22 percent of the U.N. regular budget and more than 27 percent of the U.N. peacekeeping budget. In dollar terms, the Administration’s budget for FY 2011 requested $516.3 million for the U.N. regular budget and more than $2.182 billion for the peacekeeping budget.[2]
...

www.heritage.org...

President Trump has already stated he will be cutting a lot of the funding that goes to the U.N.. But imo he should cut all funding to the U.N.

Thomson Reuters Foundation editor-in-chief Belinda Goldsmith, states that the cost of implementing the U.N. Agenda 2030 is $172.5 trillion. But do we really want to give so much money, or any money to an organization that wants to destroy sovereingty/nationalism, and wants to get rid of all borders just so a small group of globalists can control the whole world?

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Trump is supposed to be a populist, as opposed to a globalist. But, clearly, he is not. He is not a globalist, as many of his fans would think. That would leave Dictator.

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Trump is supposed to be a populist, as opposed to a globalist. But, clearly, he is not. He is not a globalist, as many of his fans would think. That would leave Dictator.

More stupid comments.

So if you are not a populist or a globalist you must, by the statements of Relda the Knowing, you have to be a dictator.

I am very much sick of the diatribe.

P

a reply to: reldra

LOL, why, because he doesn't want to play by your rules? When you come up with something intelligent let us know.

It's funny how leftists like yourself keep trying to claim "Trump is a racist, Trump is a dictator", yet it is your side, the left that under the Obama administration have been labeling people as possible extremists for not espousing love to the "progressive diatribe"... Dictators are those who seek to silence their opposition, and that is what your side has been doing. Wake the hell up and smell the roses, you are the one cheering for the dictators.

a reply to: reldra

He is not a globalist, as many of his fans would think. That would leave Dictator.

Actually many of his fans know he is not a globalist. Hence the reason they are fans.

And its difficult to nigh impossible for a dictator to show up with the current system of checks and balances we have. You know he was elected right?

S&F and hopefully many nations of te world are wising up to some of their programs... Not soon enough for me..

I suppose once upon a time there were dreams of a United Nations holding hands and stopping wrong doing and wars thru their shear numbers and will. That has certainly been proven to only be a dream for the results are mostly a figment of someone's imagination IMO..

When Saudi Arabia was put on the human rights committee any small vestige of respect I once had for them dried up like a stain in someones underwear.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

How about Obama, the King of Censorship (CENSORSHIP: The Universal Language of Dictators), who unprecedentedly wont retire now like every other single or double term POTUS, working in the shadows directing his nationwide goon & Blackshirt squad initiatives, IC / Deep State machinations, etc.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: reldra

LOL, why, because he doesn't want to play by your rules? When you come up with something intelligent let us know.

It's funny how leftists like yourself keep trying to claim "Trump is a racist, Trump is a dictator", yet it is your side, the left that under the Obama administration have been labeling people as possible extremists for not espousing love to the "progressive diatribe"... Dictators are those who seek to silence their opposition, and that is what your side has been doing. Wake the hell up and smell the roses, you are the one cheering for the dictators.

I'm trying to understand your criticism of the left. Espousing love, that is, not tolerating intolerance is equivalent to dictatorship? So I am trying to understand this idea. If not allowing dictatorship means you are a dictator. Therefore, we must allow dictators to be oppressive so progressives are not dictators. Got it.

a reply to: dfnj2015

If you still look at everything thru that shortsightedness, I expect I could write you a book catered specifically to you personally, and you reject whatever you do even bother to read. But these cartoons here might give you a lens by which you might begin to fathom how the PC / SJW mindset is everything it was supposed to be against:

a reply to: reldra

You know he was elected right?

Not that I have much of an opinion on Trump.  But, you do realize a lot of dictators were originally elected and then exceeded their powers. Like Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini to name a few...

originally posted by: dfnj2015

I'm trying to understand your criticism of the left. Espousing love, that is, not tolerating intolerance is equivalent to dictatorship? So I am trying to understand this idea. If not allowing dictatorship means you are a dictator. Therefore, we must allow dictators to be oppressive so progressives are not dictators. Got it.

You are trying to understand? How is that so, have you seen what has been happening in European countries that completely opened their borders in the name of "multiculturalism"?...

BTW, what love are you talking about? in what way is President Trump oppressive, and please try to write a coherent argument.

a reply to: reldra

Dictators can come in any form and shape and in any political side, it's irrelevant.

originally posted by: dug88

a reply to: reldra

You know he was elected right?

Not that I have much of an opinion on Trump.  But, you do realize a lot of dictators were originally elected and then exceeded their powers. Like Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini to name a few...

And none of those guys showed up in the political system we have in the US.

And by the way, have you ever heard of the Lebensborn?

Before you people want to make any more "Trump is just like Hitler" statements you would be wise to educate yourself.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

European countries that completely opened their borders in the name of "multiculturalism"?...

Actually, they opened their borders (within the EU) primarily for economic reasons.
But yes, European countries are struggling to deal with an enormous influx of refugees.

Democracy is based on the assumption that a million men are wiser than one man. How's that again? I missed something.
Autocracy is based on the assumption that one man is wiser than a million men. Let's play that over again, too. Who decides?

originally posted by: Cancerwarrior

originally posted by: dug88

a reply to: reldra

You know he was elected right?

Not that I have much of an opinion on Trump.  But, you do realize a lot of dictators were originally elected and then exceeded their powers. Like Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini to name a few...

And none of those guys showed up in the political system we have in the US.

And by the way, have you ever heard of the Lebensborn?

Before you people want to make any more "Trump is just like Hitler" statements you would be wise to educate yourself.

Lol where did I say Trump is like Hitler? I said I have no opinion on Trump and responded to a comment refuting the opinion a dictator can't be such because they were elected by giving a list of dictators that had been elected into government.

a reply to: dug88

You did'nt, but he was on your list of axis powers. And by the way, those guys "elections" were anything but free and fair.

Comparing Trump to a "democratically elected dictator" is a distraction and any argument that draws that parallel is destined to futility. Rather than demonizing Trump as a dictator, it normalizes dictators.

A Hitler-like figure cannot achieve power in the U.S. because America’s founders -- fearful of rule by a foreign tyrant, which was how they viewed Great Britain -- carefully divided the executive, legislative and judicial powers of their government, to prevent it from happening.

a reply to: Cancerwarrior

And its difficult to nigh impossible for a dictator to show up with the current system of checks and balances we have.

Please explain that to Trump. He seems to think he can fire Congressmen.

a reply to: DJW001

He seems to think he can fire Congressmen.

Got a source of any kind?

originally posted by: Cancerwarrior
a reply to: DJW001

He seems to think he can fire Congressmen.

Got a source of any kind?

www.washingtonexaminer.com...

originally posted by: dug88

a reply to: reldra

You know he was elected right?

Not that I have much of an opinion on Trump.  But, you do realize a lot of dictators were originally elected and then exceeded their powers. Like Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini to name a few...

Hitler was not in fact elected to be head of the government of Germany. it was coercion, intimidation and blackmail that was used to gain initial power. in fact the Nazi tactics used before, during and after said election closely mirrors what the democrat supporters did before and during the election, and have been doing ever since the last election. and it was that which Hitler used as the stick in his bid for power (the carrot being to supposedly rein in his party's supporters). how many times have we seen those against Trump wanting the election to be redone (without Trump being allowed to run), and/or to replace Trump with Hillary, without an election (which runs completely against the succession of power rules)? and this is why neither of these types of things can be allowed to be done. of course Hitler's next step was the Reichstag fire (a false flag event, today it would likely be some sort of terrorist attack, probably featuring supposed Republicans, like the Nazi's used a "communist" patsy). that was Hitler's reasoning for gaining temporary dictatorial powers to deal with the issue of communist terrorism. of course he used that power to illegalize the communist party, and indeed every other party but the Nazi party. just as many democrats would love to see happen with the evil, intolerant, Islamiphobic, etc Republican party, for the "good of the nation".