Obama to seal US-UN relationship

Obama to seal US-UN relationship

www.ft.com

Barack Obama will cement the new co-operative relationship between the US and the United Nations this month when he becomes the first American president to chair its 15-member Security Council.

(visit the link for the full news article)



Related Article:
www.telegraph.co.uk...

[edit on 9/8/2009 by thomasblackraven]

Well, it's all downhill from here...

Between Obama chairing the Security Council & the UN pushing for a world currency (see above link), we're in for a heck of a ride. The interesting part is that these series of events seem to be syncing up with the leaked reports from this years Bilderberg meeting.

www.ft.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 9/8/2009 by thomasblackraven]

reply to post by thomasblackraven


what leaked reports, what do they say?

He sure likes to seal things. He seals his school records. He seals his health records. He even seals his birth certificate.

Now he's going in secret with the UNITED NATIONS and sealing that too!

He'll be the first president to CHAIR the counsel? He'll be head honcho for both the UN and the US?

He sure has risen to power awfully fast.

There is a freaking reason an American President has never served as chair of the UN Security Council.

The United States President is beholden to the citizens of this country, not the freaking United Nations.

Where is the NY Times, Washington Post, heck even the Huffington Post? ....never mind them I'm sure Glenn Beck will do their job for them.

Originally posted by thomasblackraven

Obama to seal US-UN relationship

www.ft.com

Barack Obama will cement the new co-operative relationship between the US and the United Nations this month when he becomes the first American president to chair its 15-member Security Council.

(visit the link for the full news article)



Related Article:
www.telegraph.co.uk...

[edit on 9/8/2009 by thomasblackraven]

the first American president to chair its 15-member Security Council.

UHOH, this can't be good.

Originally posted by Stormdancer777

Originally posted by thomasblackraven

Obama to seal US-UN relationship

www.ft.com

Barack Obama will cement the new co-operative relationship between the US and the United Nations this month when he becomes the first American president to chair its 15-member Security Council.

(visit the link for the full news article)



Related Article:
www.telegraph.co.uk...

[edit on 9/8/2009 by thomasblackraven]

the first American president to chair its 15-member Security Council.

UHOH, this can't be good.

One world government under the reign of the anti-Christ. And the chip implant could be the mark of the beast. One world currency...

It's all coming together.

The UNITED NATIONS is a problem and has been for a long time.

Every Person deserves to be a free and sovereign individual.

This begins at home, with their country retaining it's natural right to sovereignty.


The United Nations stands steadfast against the sovereignty of countries and people all around the world.

Please talk about and teach this to your friends and family. They should shun, curse and not participate in any and all United Nations activities.

Thank you ATS

Originally posted by RRconservative
Where is the NY Times, Washington Post, heck even the Huffington Post? ....never mind them I'm sure Glenn Beck will do their job for them.

Well here's something that ties to this quite well


Everything that has happened was a means to an end

Remember that the next time you visit a thread on terrroism, North Korea, Iran or any other puppet shows.

Well, there you go again!

Obama will chair A MEETING of the Security Council, not the Council itself.
And perhaps you can explain what's so awful about The President chairing a meeting to discuss the Non proliferation of nuclear weapons?
Would you prefer Iran to chair the meetings?
Don't you think this totally knee jerk Obama hysteria is getting just a little out of hand?
Jeeeez H!

Originally posted by OldDragger
Obama will chair A MEETING of the Security Council, not the Council itself.

Currently the chair is on a rotating status for this month.
Obama will be holding the chair for 3 days

Originally posted by OldDragger
And perhaps you can explain what's so awful about The President chairing a meeting to discuss the Non proliferation of nuclear weapons?

Well this may go back to Iran and North Korea
I remember Hilary talking about intercepting all shipments going to North Korea
I also remember the hysteria when Iran spoke of nuclear energy

The so-called Democratic People's Republic of Korea is an economic wreck; a half million or more people starved to death a decade ago. The regime is largely friendless and faces a destabilizing leadership transition. Pyongyang's large military is antiquated; though the North is developing both missile and nuclear technologies, it has no present ability to attack the U.S. and, in any case, would be wiped out by any retaliatory strike.

Iran is a military midget, at least compared to America. Tehran's estimated military outlays run about $8 billion annually--less than two percent of America's level. Iran's military has been untested for two decades, and much of the Iranian security apparatus is directed at domestic repression.

www.huffingtonpost.com...

The person chairing the seat is the same person under who's clock the false claims about North Korea and Iran being major threats were being spreaded.

He can still chair it though, but I don't have high hopes that he will be a fair voice.

The entire "we can have nuclear arms but not you" message never worked and never will.

Originally posted by OldDragger
Would you prefer Iran to chair the meetings?

See above the link and how you seeing them as a threat is just being a subject of untruths.

Originally posted by OldDragger
Don't you think this totally knee jerk Obama hysteria is getting just a little out of hand?
Jeeeez H!

The only Obama hysteria I see is coming from his fans.

You may say "ya but never occured to this extent with Bush"
Sure, but the difference is Obama ran so hard on a campaign of change and hope.
Bush also ran on sensible foreign policy approach, when the exact opposite happened. Sure.

But many people found Obama's campaign message to be very poignant, despite it being completely empty.