A bombshell article in today’s edition of the New York Times lifts the lid on how the brother of Afghan President Hamid Karzai, a suspected kingpin of the country’s booming opium trade, has been on the CIA payroll for the past eight years. However, the article serves as little more than a whitewash because it fails to address the fact that one of the primary reasons behind the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan was the agenda to reinstate the Golden Crescent drug trade.
“The agency pays (Ahmed Wali) Karzai for a variety of services, including helping to recruit an Afghan paramilitary force that operates at the C.I.A.’s direction in and around the southern city of Kandahar, Mr. Karzai’s home,” reports the Times.
An October 2008 report from the Times reveals how, after security forces discovered a huge tractor-trailer full of heroin outside Kandahar in 2004, “Before long, the commander, Habibullah Jan, received a telephone call from Ahmed Wali Karzai, the brother of President Hamid Karzai, asking him to release the vehicle and the drugs.”
In 2006, following the discovery of another cache of heroin, “United States investigators told other American officials that they had discovered links between the drug shipment and a bodyguard believed to be an intermediary for Ahmed Wali Karzai.”
The Times article out today also discusses how the CIA uses Karzai as a go-between between the Americans and the Taliban. He is also directly implicated in the manufacturing of phony ballots and polling stations that were attributed to the President’s disputed election victory.
“If it looks like a duck, and it quacks like a duck, it’s probably a duck,” the American officer said of Mr. Karzai. “Our assumption is that he’s benefiting from the drug trade.”
Officials quoted by The Times described Karzai as a Mafia-like figure who expanded his influence over the drug trade with the aid of U.S. efforts to eliminate his competitors.
The Afghan opium trade has exploded since the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan, following a lull after the Taliban had imposed a crackdown. According to the U.N., the drug trade is now worth $65 billion. Afghanistan produces 92 per cent of the world’s opium, with the equivalent of 3,500 tonnes leaving the country each year. Other figures put the number far higher, at around 6,100 tonnes a year.
The New York Times exposé pins the blame on Karzai, but fails to explain that one of the primary reasons behind the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan was the United States’ agenda to restore, not eradicate, the drug trade.
Before the invasion, the Taliban collaborated closely with the U.N. to reduce opium production down to just 185 tonnes, a figure at least 2000% below current levels. The notion that the “Taliban benefits from the drug trade” and that the U.S. is trying to stop it, as both Bush and Obama claimed, is the complete opposite of what is actually happening.
As Professor Michel Chossudovsky has highlighted in a series of essays, the explosion of opium production after the invasion was about the CIA’s drive to restore the lucrative Golden Crescent opium trade that was in place during the time when the Agency were funding the Mujahideen rebels to fight the Soviets, and flood the streets of America and Britain with cheap heroin, destroying lives while making obscene profits.
The Times implies that the drug lord Karzai being on the CIA payroll is little more than an embarrassing coincidence, when in reality he is just a middle manager for the U.S. military-industrial complex’s control of the drug trade in Afghanistan which stretches back decades and was only interrupted when the Taliban came to power.
“Heroin is a multibillion dollar business supported by powerful interests, which requires a steady and secure commodity flow. One of the “hidden” objectives of the war was precisely to restore the CIA sponsored drug trade to its historical levels and exert direct control over the drug routes,” writes Chossudovsky.
“As revealed in the Iran-Contra and Bank of Commerce and Credit International (BCCI) scandals, CIA covert operations in support of the Afghan Mujahideen had been funded through the laundering of drug money. “Dirty money” was recycled –through a number of banking institutions (in the Middle East) as well as through anonymous CIA shell companies–, into “covert money,” used to finance various insurgent groups during the Soviet-Afghan war, and its aftermath.”
Within two years of the CIA’s covert operation in Afghanistan, “CIA assets again controlled this heroin trade. As the Mujahideen guerrillas seized territory inside Afghanistan, they ordered peasants to plant opium as a revolutionary tax. Across the border in Pakistan, Afghan leaders and local syndicates under the protection of Pakistan Intelligence operated hundreds of heroin laboratories. During this decade of wide-open drug-dealing, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency in Islamabad failed to instigate major seizures or arrests.”
This is the history of the Afghan opium trade that the Times won’t tell you, and in failing to do so today’s article serves only to whitewash the true scale of the agenda behind the U.S. occupation of Afghanistan.
Len Horowitz Files Pandemic Charges with FBI in NYC
The substance of the message below on a false flag h1n1 flu pandemic has been widely discussed on the net for months, but the message indicates the first serious US legal action I have seen on it. I have with the help of many been tracking this issue as it affects states and localities, anticipating the need to file injunction lawsuits v. any government taking steps to compel vaccination. It is presumed by Dr. Horowitz and others that government will attempt to compel vaccination v. h1n1, which is not possible under current law, especially US Constitution and state constitution law for many First Amendment and related privacy and civil rights reasons. I offer the message as a warning as to how serious the talks, research and some of the proposed h1n1 policy state laws under consideration opposing civil rights, especially in ME, MA and OK, have become.
Having read of lawsuits filed against h1n1 in Europe for reasons indicated in the below article, I am convinced that there is considerable reason not to take any new so called h1n1 vaccine, and to prepare for simlilar suits in the US, which I am prepared to do.
To lawyers receiving this message, I welcome your comments on how to prepare clients and friends to defend against unconstitutional h1n1 legislation and acts, and any common effort we might begin in the US.
Harold Burbank 2008 CT Green Party candidate, US House Release: No. H1N1-15 Date Mailed: Sept. 15, 2009 For Immediate Release Contact: Rob Potter–(959) 715-1520 or 310-877-5002
This amazing cartoon was in the Chicago Tribune in 1934. Look carefully at the plan of action.
Remember the adage:
"Those who do not remember the past aredoomed to repeat it".
50 QUESTIONS THAT NEED 2B ANSWERED
THE ROVING EYE Fifty questions on 9/11 By Pepe Escobar
It's September 11 all over again - eight years on. The George W Bush administration is out. The "global war on terror" is still on, renamed "overseas contingency operations" by the Barack Obama administration. Obama's "new strategy" - a war escalation - is in play in AfPak. Osama bin Laden may be dead or not. "Al-Qaeda" remains a catch-all ghost entity. September 11 - the neo-cons' "new Pearl Harbor" - remains the darkest jigsaw puzzle of the young 21st century.
It's useless to expect US corporate media and the ruling elites' political operatives to call for a true, in-depth investigation into the attacks on the US on September 11, 2001. Whitewash has been the norm. But even establishment highlight Dr Zbig "Grand Chessboard" Brzezinski, a former national security advisor, has
admitted to the US Senate that the post-9/11 "war on terror" is a "mythical historical narrative".
The following questions, some multi-part - and most totally ignored by the 9/11 Commission - are just the tip of the immense 9/11 iceberg. A hat tip goes to the indefatigable work of 911truth.org; whatreallyhappened.com; architects and engineers for 9/11 truth; the Italian documentary Zero: an investigation into 9/11; and Asia Times Online readers' e-mails.
None of these questions has been convincingly answered - according to the official narrative. It's up to US civil society to keep up the pressure. Eight years after the fact, one fundamental conclusion is imperative. The official narrative edifice of 9/11 is simply not acceptable.
Fifty questions 1) How come dead or not dead Osama bin Laden has not been formally indicted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) as responsible for 9/11? Is it because the US government - as acknowledged by the FBI itself - has not produced a single conclusive piece of evidence?
2) How could all the alleged 19 razor-blade box cutter-equipped Muslim perpetrators have been identified in less than 72 hours - without even a crime scene investigation?
3) How come none of the 19's names appeared on the passenger lists released the same day by both United Airlines and American Airlines?
4) How come eight names on the "original" FBI list happened to be found alive and living in different countries?
5) Why would pious jihadi Mohammed Atta leave a how-to-fly video manual, a uniform and his last will inside his bag knowing he was on a suicide mission?
6) Why did Mohammed Atta study flight simulation at Opa Locka, a hub of no less than six US Navy training bases?
7) How could Mohammed Atta's passport have been magically found buried among the Word Trade Center (WTC)'s debris when not a single flight recorder was found?
8) Who is in the possession of the "disappeared" eight indestructible black boxes on those four flights?
9) Considering multiple international red alerts about a possible terrorist attack inside the US - including former secretary of state Condoleezza Rice's infamous August 6, 2001, memo - how come four hijacked planes deviating from their computerized flight paths and disappearing from radar are allowed to fly around US airspace for more than an hour and a half - not to mention disabling all the elaborate Pentagon's defense systems in the process?
10) Why the secretary of the US Air Force James Roche did not try to intercept both planes hitting the WTC (only seven minutes away from McGuire Air Force Base in New Jersey) as well as the Pentagon (only 10 minutes away from McGuire)? Roche had no less than 75 minutes to respond to the plane hitting the Pentagon. 11) Why did George W Bush continue to recite "My Pet Goat" in his Florida school and was not instantly absconded by the secret service?
12) How could Bush have seen the first plane crashing on WTC live - as he admitted? Did he have previous knowledge - or is he psychic?
13) Bush said that he and Andrew Card initially thought the first hit on the WTC was an accident with a small plane. How is that possible when the FAA as well as NORAD already knew this was about a hijacked plane?
14) What are the odds of transponders in four different planes be turned off almost simultaneously, in the same geographical area, very close to the nation's seat of power in Washington, and no one scrambles to contact the Pentagon or the media?
15) Could defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld explain why initial media reports said that there were no fighter jets available at Andrews Air Force Base and then change the reports that there were, but not on high alert?
16) Why was the DC Air National Guard in Washington AWOL on 9/11?
17) Why did combat jet fighters of the 305th Air Wing, McGuire Air Force Base in New Jersey not intercept the second hijacked plane hitting the WTC, when they could have done it within seven minutes?
18) Why did none of the combat jet fighters of the 459th Aircraft Squadron at Andrews Air Force Base intercept the plane that hit the Pentagon, only 16 kilometers away? And since we're at it, why the Pentagon did not release the full video of the hit?
19) A number of very experienced airline pilots - including US ally Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, a former fighter jet pilot - revealed that, well, only crack pilots could have performed such complex maneuvers on the hijacked jets, while others insisted they could only have been accomplished by remote control. Is it remotely believable that the hijackers were up to the task?
20) How come a substantial number of witnesses did swear seeing and hearing multiple explosions in both towers of the WTC?
21) How come a substantial number of reputed architects and engineers are adamant that the official narrative simply does not explain the largest structural collapse in recorded history (the Twin Towers) as well as the collapse of WTC building 7, which was not even hit by a jet?
22) According to Frank de Martini, WTC's construction manager, "We designed the building to resist the impact of one or more jetliners." The second plane nearly missed tower 1; most of the fuel burned in an explosion outside the tower. Yet this tower collapsed first, long before tower 2 that was "perforated" by the first hit. Jet fuel burned up fast - and by far did not reach the 2000-degree heat necessary to hurt the six tubular steel columns in the center of the tower - designed specifically to keep the towers from collapsing even if hit by a Boeing 707. A Boeing 707 used to carry more fuel than the Boeing 757 and Boeing 767 that actually hit the towers.
23) Why did Mayor Rudolph Giuliani instantly authorized the shipment of WTC rubble to China and India for recycling?
24) Why was metallic debris found no less than 13 kilometers from the crash site of the plane that went down in Pennsylvania? Was the plane in fact shot down - under vice president Dick Cheney's orders?
25) The Pipelineistan question. What did US ambassador Wendy Chamberlain talk about over the phone on October 10, 2001, with the oil minister of Pakistan? Was it to tell him that the 1990s-planned Unocal gas pipeline project, TAP (Turkmenistan/Afghanistan/ Pakistan), abandoned because of Taliban demands on transit fees, was now back in business? (Two months later, an agreement to build the pipeline was signed between the leaders of the three countries).
26) What is former Unocal lobbyist and former Bush pet Afghan Zalmay Khalilzad up to in Afghanistan?
27) How come former Pakistani foreign minister Niaz Niak said in mid-July 2001 that the US had already decided to strike against Osama bin Laden and the Taliban by October? The topic was discussed secretly at the July Group of Eight summit in Genoa, Italy, according to Pakistani diplomats.
28) How come US ambassador to Yemen Barbara Bodine told FBI agent John O'Neill in July 2001 to stop investigating al-Qaeda's financial operations - with O'Neill instantly moved to a security job at the WTC, where he died on 9/11?
29) Considering the very intimate relationship between the Taliban and Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), and the ISI and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), is Bin Laden alive, dead or still a valuable asset of the ISI, the CIA or both?
30) Was Bin Laden admitted at the American hospital in Dubai in the United Arab Emirates on July 4, 2001, after flying from Quetta, Pakistan, and staying for treatment until July 11?
31) Did the Bin Laden group build the caves of Tora Bora in close cooperation with the CIA during the 1980s' anti-Soviet jihad?
32) How come General Tommy Franks knew for sure that Bin Laden was hiding in Tora Bora in late November 2001?
33) Why did president Bill Clinton abort a hit on Bin Laden in October 1999? Why did then-Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf abort a covert ops in the same date? And why did Musharraf do the same thing again in August 2001?
34) Why did George W Bush dissolve the Bin Laden Task Force nine months before 9/11?
35) How come the (fake) Bin Laden home video - in which he "confesses" to being the perpetrator of 9/11 - released by the US on December 13, 2001, was found only two weeks after it was produced (on November 9); was it really found in Jalalabad (considering Northern Alliance and US troops had not even arrived there at the time); by whom; and how come the Pentagon was forced to release a new translation after the first (botched) one?
36) Why was ISI chief Lieutenant General Mahmud Ahmad abruptly "retired" on October 8, 2001, the day the US started bombing Afghanistan?
37) What was Ahmad up to in Washington exactly on the week of 9/11 (he arrived on September 4)? On the morning of 9/11, Ahmad was having breakfast on Capitol Hill with Bob Graham and Porter Goss, both later part of the 9/11 Commission, which simply refused to investigate two of its members. Ahmad had breakfast with Richard Armitage of the State Department on September 12 and 13 (when Pakistan negotiated its "cooperation" with the "war on terror") and met all the CIA and Pentagon top brass. On September 13, Musharraf announced he would send Ahmad to Afghanistan to demand to the Taliban the extradition of Bin Laden. 38) Who inside the ISI transferred US$100,000 to Mohammed Atta in the summer of 2001 - under orders of Ahmad himself, as Indian intelligence insists? Was it really ISI asset Omar Sheikh, Bin Laden's information technology specialist who later organized the slaying of American journalist Daniel Pearl in Karachi? So was the ISI directly linked to 9/11?
39) Did the FBI investigate the two shady characters who met Mohammed Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi in Harry's Bar at the Helmsley Hotel in New York City on September 8, 2001?
40) What did director of Asian affairs at the State Department Christina Rocca and the Taliban ambassador to Pakistan Abdul Salam Zaeef discuss in their meeting in Islamabad in August 2001?
41) Did Washington know in advance that an "al-Qaeda" connection would kill Afghan nationalist commander Ahmad Shah Massoud, aka "The Lion of the Panjshir", only two days before 9/11? Massoud was fighting the Taliban and al-Qaeda - helped by Russia and Iran. According to the Northern Alliance, Massoud was killed by an ISI-Taliban-al Qaeda axis. If still alive, he would never have allowed the US to rig a loya jirga (grand council) in Afghanistan and install a puppet, former CIA asset Hamid Karzai, as leader of the country.
42) Why did it take no less than four months before the name of Ramzi Binalshibh surfaced in the 9/11 context, considering the Yemeni was a roommate of Mohammed Atta in his apartment cell in Hamburg?
43) Is pathetic shoe-bomber Richard Reid an ISI asset?
44) Did then-Russian president Vladimir Putin and Russian intelligence tell the CIA in 2001 that 25 terrorist pilots had been training for suicide missions?
45) When did the head of German intelligence, August Hanning, tell the CIA that terrorists were "planning to hijack commercial aircraft?"
46) When did Egyptian President Mubarak tell the CIA about an attack on the US with an "airplane stuffed with explosives?"
47) When did Israel's Mossad director Efraim Halevy tell the CIA about a possible attack on the US by "200 terrorists?"
48) Were the Taliban aware of the warning by a Bush administration official as early as February 2001 - "Either you accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs?"
49) Has Northrop-Grumman used Global Hawk technology - which allows to remotely control unmanned planes - in the war in Afghanistan since October 2001? Did it install Global Hawk in a commercial plane? Is Global Hawk available at all for commercial planes?
50) Would Cheney stand up and volunteer the detailed timeline of what he was really up to during the whole day on 9/11?
COMMENT: Congress is back in session, the caravans and buses are heading to Washington for the big rally on Saturday, and the President addressed congress last evening urging passage of ObamaCare. Go HERE to send an email to your senators and congressmen. For out-of-state subscribers, find your Senators HERE; find your Congressman HERE.
Transcript of the President's address HERE. Seven Reasons Abortion is in the Health Care Overhaul HERE. Senator Bob Coker's statement on President's speech HERE. Congressman Blackburn's statement on President's speech HERE. Congressman Bart Gordon's statement on President's speech HERE. Congressman Zach Wamp's statement on President's speech HERE. Obama's Big Gamble
If you were expecting something new from President Obama’s speech last night, disappointment abounds. After over six months of hawking nationalized health care, a day of televised interviews broadcast from the White House on a major broadcast network, prime time news conferences, over two dozen speeches around the country and now an address to a joint session of Congress, is it possible that the President actually thinks the American people don’t understand that Democrats want the government to run our health care system?
The President said last night he supports the “government option” -- he called it a means to an end -- and that’s something the American people fully understand, but not in the way he intended.
That’s part of the President’s problem. He did not overcome his biggest obstacle last night, which is the common sense understanding of the American people. You cannot give better coverage to those who have insurance, put millions people more into the system, pay for it by ending waste and abuse, claim you will lower health care costs, create a government-run exchange, include government health care coverage and not spend a dime -- all at the same time. That’s a fairy tale.
If it’s that easy, why not first cut the hundreds of billions of dollars a year in waste, fraud and abuse? Just do it and stop talking about it. You don’t need a bill for that.
One of the more outrageous claims made by Obama last night, “If you come to me with a serious set of proposals, I will be there to listen. My door is always open.” (Unnoticed by most of the media, when the President made this absurd remark, several Republican members in the chamber held up the bills they’ve introduced which have been ignored by the White House.)
On May 13, House Republican leaders wrote to the President asking for a meeting to, “… respectfully request a meeting with you to discuss areas for potential common ground on health care reform.” Nearly four months later, still no meeting. The President has not met with Republicans since the White House dog and pony show in April.
Yet Obama made this pledge in July:
“When we come back in September, I will be available to answer any question that members of Congress have. If they want to come over to the White House and go over line by line what's going on, I will be happy to do that.”
House Republicans including RSC Chairman Tom Price (Ga.), Representatives Phil Roe (Tenn.), Michael Burgess (Texas), Bill Cassidy (La.), Jason Chaffetz (Utah), and Steve Scalise (La.) accepted the President’s invitation to go through the bill line by line. They have been literally ignored. Read more here.
AP Analysis: Obama Uses Iffy Math on Pledge to Avoid Adding to the Deficit (Fact Check) Thursday, September 10, 2009 Washington (AP) - President Barack Obama used only-in-Washington accounting Wednesday when he promised to overhaul the nation's health care system without adding "one dime" to the deficit. By conventional arithmetic, Democratic plans would drive up the deficit by billions of dollars.
The president's speech to Congress contained a variety of oversimplifications and omissions in laying out what he wants to do about health insurance. A look at some of Obama's claims and how they square with the facts or the fuller story: Read more here
HR 3200 currently under consideration in the House of Representatives
• Sec. 123, Pg. 30 – A gov’t committee will decide what treatments and benefits you get.
• Sec. 1711, Pg. 764 - The gov’t will REQUIRE preventative services,including vaccinations.
• Sec. 152, Pg. 50-51 - HC will be provided to ALL NON-U.S. citizens.
Seniors, Life Threatening Illness, & Low Income
• Sec. 1121, Pg. 239, Lines 14-24 - The government will limit and reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors, low income and poor are the ones affected.
• Sec. 1145, Pg. 272 - Cancer patients and their treatment are open to rationing!
• Sec. 1177, Pg. 354 - Government will RESTRICT enrollment of special needs people! “Extension of Authority of Special Needs Plans to Restrict Enrollment.”
• Sec. 1233, Pg. 425, Lines 4-12 - Government mandates Advance (Death) Care Planning consultation. END-OF-LIFE COUNSELING
• Sec. 1233, Pg. 430, Lines 11-15 - The government will decide what level of treatment you will have at end of life, according to preset methods (not individually decided).
• Sec. 163, Pg. 59, Lines 21-24 - Government will have direct access to your bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.
• Sec. 1713, Pg. 768, Lines 3-5 - Nurse Home Visit Services – Service #1: “Improving maternal or child health and pregnancy outcomes or increasing birth intervals between pregnancies.”
• Sec. 440, Pg. 837-839 - The government will design and implement Home Visitation Program for families with young kids and families that are expecting children.
• Sec. 1904, Pg. 843-844 - This Home Visitation Program includes the government coming into your house and teaching/telling you how to parent!
Private Insurance Not An ‘Option’ In The End
• Sec. 113, Pg. 21-22 - MANDATES a government audit of the books of ALL EMPLOYERS that self-insure in order to “ensure that the law does not provide incentives for small and mid-size employers to self-insure”!
• Sec. 205, Pg. 102, Lines 12-18 - Medicaid-eligible individuals will be automatically enrolled in Medicaid. No freedom to choose.
• Sec. 201, Pg. 72, Lines 8-14 - Government is creating an HC Exchange to bring private plans under government control, including mandatory benefit packages.
• Sec. 401.59B, Pg. 167, Lines 18-23 - ANY individual who does not have acceptable care, according to government, will be taxed 2.5% of income.
• Sec. 59B, Pg. 170, Line 1 - Any NONRESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes.
• Sec. 312, Pg. 145, Lines 15-17 - Employers MUST auto-enroll employees into public option plan.
• Sec. 205, Pg. 95, Lines 8-18 - The government will use groups (i.e., ACORN & AmeriCorps) to “inform and educate” (sign up) individuals for government plan.
Doctors, Pharmaceuticals, & Hospitals
• Sec. 225, Pg. 127, Lines 1-16 - Doctors – The gov’t will tell YOU what you can make. “The Secretary shall provide for the annual participation of physicians under the public health insurance option, for which payment may be made for services furnished during the year.”
• Sec. 1121, Pg. 241, Lines 6-8 - Doctors, it does not matter what specialty you have; you’ll all be paid the same. “Service categories established under this paragraph shall apply without regard to the specialty of the physician furnishing the service.”
• Sec. 1151, Pg. 298, Lines 9-11 - Doctors, treat a patient during initial admission that results in a readmission and the government will penalize you for that action.
• Sec. 1156, Pg. 317, Lines 13-20 - “PROHIBITION on physician ownership or Investment.” Government tells doctors what/how much they can own.
• Sec. 1156, Pg. 317-318, Lines 21-25, 1-3 - “PROHIBITION on Expansion of Facility Capacity.” The government will mandate that hospitals cannot expand (“number of operating rooms or beds”).
• Sec. 1501 (beginning), Pg. 659-670 - Doctors in Residency – government will tell you where your residency will be, thus where you’ll live.
• Sec. 1503 (beginning), Pg. 675-685 - Government will regulate hospitals in EVERY aspect of residency programs, including teaching hospitals.
• Sec. 1733, Pg. 788-798 - Government will set and mandate drug prices, therefore controlling which drugs are brought to market. (Goodbye innovation and private research.)
Reviewed, revised and adapted on July 29, 2009, by Liberty Counsel from the original authored by Peter Fleckenstein and posted on FreeRepublic.com
The United Nations’ Convention on the Rights of the Child Treaty
1.The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child(CRC) is an 18 member committee of non-U.S. citizens in Geneva, Switzerland that will oversee the US government in defining the criteria by which to measure “fitness” of your parenting.This committee periodically provides reports and recommendations to our federal government which are expected to regulate or our nation’s policy decisions.
2.Under the CRC,your rights as a parent will be based on the government’s delegation of that role to you, thus allowing for the government’s intrusion into that relationship at their discretion. (Art. 18 of the treaty explains this)
3.It operates on a “best interest principle” which gives the government the ability to legislate the religious & education influence, privacy, and leisure of children, overriding every decision made by the parent if the government disagrees with it.
4.In current application, this philosophy has already led to:
>mandatory sex education at age 4 in the Netherlands
>parents being restricted from checking their own child’s e-mail or chat rooms in Japan
>government control of “private schools” in Belgium
>illegal status of reasonable discipline in the form of spankings & time-outs, as well as home
schooling, in Sweden
>mandating home visits in Britain to interview home schooled children about their desires regarding
5.Article Six of our constitution makes any treaty ratified by two-thirds of the Senate to be “Supreme Law” of the land, second only to the Constitution of the United States.This over-rides the Tenth Amendment which many wrongly believe would protect parents.
The State Department is now processing this treaty for presentation to the U.S. Senate this Fall.
WHAT CAN WE DO TO PREVENT THIS?
TAKE ACTION in the following ways:
1)Call/Email these US Senators from TN and state firmly that they oppose UN Convention and urge them to sign as a Co-Sponsor of the Parental Rights Amendment SJ Res.16 below which would protect against this treaty.(Only the Senate will vote on the Treaty)
Sen. Lamar Alexander202-224-4944Sen. Bob Corker202-224-3344
2)Call/Email these US Representative from TN urging them to Co-Sponsor the Parental Rights Amendment HJ Res 42 below which would protect against this treaty.
Jim Cooper (D-05)202-225-4311Steve Cohen (D-09)202-225-3265
Bart Gordon (D-06)202-225-4231
3)Register on-line @ ParentalRights.org for updates on future action needed.
4)Tell your friends, family, and church about this threat and ask them to call their US Congressmen
An Overview of the Parental Rights AmendmentHouse HJRes 42 & Senate SJRes 16
The liberty of parents to direct the upbringing and education
of their children is a fundamental right.
Neither the United States nor any State shall infringe upon this right without demonstrating that its governmental interest as applied to the person is of the highest order and not otherwise served.
No treaty may be adopted nor shall any source of international law be employed to supersede, modify, interpret, or apply to the rights guaranteed by this article.
NOTES TO KEEP IN MIND
1)This will not protect child abusers.
2)This will simply put into the U.S. Constitution what has been current practice for 200 years in America.
3)This will keep family law safely at the State level, not at the federal nor the international level.
ParentalRights.Org is a national organization formed for the sole purpose of protecting parental rights in our country.The history and evidence backing what we are telling you is clearly stated there and should thoroughly convince you of the threat we face.We have also studied the opposition’s evidence for the treaty and stand behind our decision to oppose it without hesitation.