Here is a short list of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). You will recognize the first three. The last two are Obama’s favorite and he does not hesitate to use them.
- Nuclear Bombs
- Biological and Chemical Weapons
- Dirty Bombs
- The United Nations (UN)
- The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
While the United States and the West concentrate their national security efforts on the potential terrorist use of nuclear bombs, biological and chemical weapons and, dirty bombs, these Western governments willingly lay themselves open to the mass destruction of their way of life to the environmentalist and to the United Nations’ grab for power over the sovereign nations they are supposed to represent.
The United Nations as a Weapon of Mass Destruction
It is no secret that the United Nations would like to become the World Government. They wish to be able to tax the member nations so that they can redistribute the world’s wealth from the rich nations to the poor nations. our President, Barack Obama, sees this as a useful weapon of mass destruction to be used against America by destroying our economy and suborning our sovereignty to the UN.
The UN wants control of the world’s oceans through the Law Of the Sea Treaty (LOST). The Obama administration supports this idea.
The UN wants control over the World Wide Web (the internet) and they want to be able to tax all nations to support this program. The Obama administration support this idea.
The UN, through the Kyoto Protocols and Agenda 21, want to reduce the world’s population and concentrate the remaining population in high density urban centers with the majority of the world’s land masses controlled by central governments with little or no use allowed by people. The Agenda 21 accord was singed by President, G. H. W. Bush, but Congress never approved the treaty. President Bill Clinton, using a Presidential Order, put Agenda 21 into practice in the US. The Obama administration thinks this is a great idea.
The UN wants a world-wide carbon cap-and-trade program worth billions of dollars. From Fox News we learn:
The organization responsible for managing a global cap-and-trade system worth billions of dollars for carbon emissions projects around the world is trying to get sweeping legal immunities for its actions, even as it plans to expand its activities dramatically in the wake of the United Nations’ Rio + 20 summit on sustainable development, which starts June 20.
The global warming/climate change folks just never stop. What is amazing is that this organization, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is not even part of the UN. Think of it as an NGO on a world scale. It came into being at the behest of the UN and we can assume it gets most of its funding from the UN, which means mostly from the US and other Western nations. The UNFCCC is funding projects in third world countries to reduce carbon output. The only proof of carbon reduction is the say so of the third world governments. It gets better. Although not a UN agency, UNFCCC is asking that their people be given diplomatic immunity:
Internal UNFCCC documents, examined by Fox News, show that among other things, top officials hope to use those immunities to avoid challenges in the future based on such things as:
–possible conflicts of interest in their duties,
–breaches of confidentiality in their work,
–violations of the due process rights of those affected by UNFCCC actions,
–making decisions or actions that are beyond the legal mandate of the organization or its subsidiaries.
And guess what? The Obama administration supports the UNFCCC and their agenda.
The EPA is a weapon of mass destruction in the hands of Barack Obama
To be fair, every agency of our government is a weapon of mass destruction in the hands of Barack Obama. The EPA is just the most aggressive and visible of the agencies. We know, for example, that various agencies are handing out grants to state and local governments to advance the UN’s Agenda 21 plan and, we know that other agencies are busy driving up the cost to electricity with food for fuel programs (ethanol) and forcing utility companies to increase their use of “renewable” energy like wind and solar and, we know the federal government is planning to spend $1.4 billion buying up private land when the government already owns the equivalent of two states of Texas. But, let’s focus on a couple of recent initiatives of the EPA.
The EPA recently came out with new standards on micro-particulate emissions, which will force coal-fire power plants to spend huge amounts of money to control this microscopic dust and will drive up electricity costs and these standards will probably cause many small coal mines to go out of business. Here’s a news flash. If you live in or have visited any of the Southwest states of our country, you have probably witnessed the spectacular sunsets that they have. The reason for these beautiful sunsets is in part due to the refraction of the sun light off of micro dust particles in the air over the dry arid states. Maybe the federal government will decide no one should be allowed to live in those states.
For the latest example on how Obama is using the EPA as a weapon of mass destruction, you will want to read this article from Human Events. The Clean Water Act of 1977 allow s the federal government to govern all pollution of “navigable waters” in the United States. You won’t believe what the EPA now considers “navigable waters”.
Lawmakers are working to block an unprecedented power grab by the Environmental Protection Agency to use the Clean Water Act (CWA) and control land alongside ditches, gullies and other ephemeral spots by claiming the sources are part of navigable waterways.
These temporary water sources are often created by rain or snowmelt, and would make it harder for private property owners to build in their own backyards, grow crops, raise livestock and conduct other activities on their own land, lawmakers say.
At least this time it appears that some lawmakers have woken-up and are trying to stop this egregious overreach by the EPA.
I’m not sure which we should worry about more; terrorist with conventional WMDs or the Obama government with unconventional WMDs.
Well, that’s what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?