The global governance agenda marches on.
In June of this year, at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, the United Nations (UN) will push for the expansion of their new and improved global environmental agency.
The UN Environmental Program (UNEP) will be promoted to “specialized agency” with a new title, UN Environment Organization (UNEO).
The UNEO will prop up the Sustainable Development division of the UN. The same agency that disseminates Agenda 21 policies to governments will be centralized into a global agency with powerful international backing.
As the unscientific assertions of a global environmental crisis, vanishing biodiversity and over-population become more “urgent” to the UN; the insertion of international governance is being covertly added into the mix as the answer to solve all problems worldwide.
Thus argues Publius. I agree.
Miller is concerned that:
The United Nation’s Committee Against Torture [whose vice-chairperson represents China] has voiced displeasure with Canada for its refugee reform bill. Furthermore, the UN “regrets” the CBSA’s Most Wanted List which targets war criminals and it also urges Canada to compensate Omar Ahmed Khadr and to bring him back to Canada promptly.
An international body, with a limited mandate, is telling a free and sovereign country with an exemplary record on human rights how to manage its affairs. It is also telling the duly elected government of Canada to compensate a self-confessed jihadist who killed an American medic. After all the little darling was only fifteen at the time and the big nasty American was trying to save his life. There is little evidence that Khadr has expressed remorse for his actions, or that he has rejected violence against the West. He is a Canadian of convenience who is morally, if not necessarily in law, a traitor.
Once upon a time in Canada we knew how to deal with traitors.
These sermons on justice are being delivered by an organization that is morally bankrupt. The United Nations Human Rights Council’s membership includes such bastions of liberty as: Angola, Burkina Faso, Cuba, Libya, Mauritania (where slavery is widespread), Qatar, the Russian Federation and Saudi Arabia. There is every reason for Canada to “review” its participation in an organization so lacking in integrity that it is willing to provide moral cover for such loathsome regimes.
Thankfully, it doesn’t seem popular with either Democrats or Republicans – for now.
House lawmakers will consider an international proposal next week to give the United Nations more control over the Internet.
The proposal is backed by China, Russia, Brazil, India and other UN members, and would give the UN’s International Telecommunication Union (ITU) more control over the governance of the Internet.
It’s an unpopular idea with lawmakers on both sides of the aisle in Congress, and officials with the Obama administration have also criticized it.
“We’re quite concerned,” Larry Strickling, the head of the Commerce Department’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration, said in an interview with The Hill earlier this year.
He said the measure would expose the Internet to “top-down regulation where it’s really the governments that are at the table, but the rest of the stakeholders aren’t.”
At a hearing earlier this month, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) also criticized the proposal. He said China and Russia are “not exactly bastions of Internet freedom.”
“Any place that bans certain terms from search should not be a leader in international Internet regulatory frameworks,” he said, adding that he will keep a close eye on the process.
Yet the proposal could come up for a vote at a UN conference in Dubai in December.