The Move Toward Global Government

There are a number of possible paths toward one-world government. One path is through the climate-change propaganda and another is through the threat of another global pandemic. On Sunday, the World Health Organization (WHO) began a series of meetings which detailed their plan for one-world government. The only good news in the quest for one-world government is the hope that the various organizations vying to control that government will eliminate each other in their quest for power.

Prophecy News Watch posted an article about the WHO meeting.

The article reports:

On Sunday, the WHO kicked off its annual 10-day World Health Assembly in Geneva, Switzerland, described as the “decision-making body of WHO.” Concerns over the WHO’s actions have been steadily building since the beginning of the pandemic, when observers noted that the WHO’s deference to China arguably worsened the spread of COVID.

In addition, observers are also pointing out that the Biden administration is working to enable the organization to “centralize authority not just for pandemics, but for any health emergency in the hands of the director-general.”

Now, says Bachmann (former congresswoman Michele Bachmann), the current World Health Assembly is poised to increase the WHO’s mandate over the health care decisions of sovereign nations.

“There’s a dual track process that they’re following,” she explained during an on the ground report from Geneva on Monday’s edition of “Washington Watch with Tony Perkins.” “One is through a global pandemic treaty that they’re calling an ‘accord.’ The second is through a package of about 300 amendments to the international health rules. Both lead to the same result. Both lead to the creation of a platform for global governance through health care. And it is a web that locks us in … the likes of which we’ve never seen before.”

As Bachmann went on to observe, the potentially massive ramifications of the decisions being made at the World Health Assembly are happening with surprisingly little fanfare.

“There were no members of Congress here,” she pointed out. “I was actually shocked because this has been a big issue that a lot of their constituents have rightfully been very concerned about. … There was no American press here. So how would anyone even know what was going on unless they tuned in and they watched for themselves?”

We need to keep in mind that many of the rules imposed during the Covid pandemic were not only unconstitutional, they allowed a dramatic increase in mail-in voting–the voting method most likely to be impacted by fraud. Please follow the link to read the entire article. America needs to stand up for its sovereignty.

Sometimes The Exceptions Tell You What Is Actually Going On

The majority of the American population is heterosexual. That does not give anyone the right to discriminate against someone who is homosexual, bisexual, or any other kind of sexual. The fact that the majority of Americans is heterosexual is simply a fact.

However, sometimes laws get passed that sound good and may sound as if they are protecting the minority, but when you examine them, they make no sense.

Bloomberg Businessweek is reporting today that California is in the process of passing a law that will ban a controversial therapy aimed at making gay people straight. My first question is, “Why is the therapy controversial?”

An interesting line in the article states:

Lieu (the bill’s author Sen. Ted Lieu) says he addressed free speech issues in SB1172 by excluding clergy and other people who are not medical professionals from the legislation.

Wait a minute–if the therapy is harmful, why are you allowing it to be continued by non-medical people? Is it because the gay community has much more power within the medical community than in the religious community?

The article points out:

Conversion therapy penetrated the national consciousness last year when former Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann was questioned over whether her husband’s Christian counseling business provided services that attempted to change gays and lesbians.

Interest in the religion-based therapy appears to have surged in recent years, sparking debates about whether sexual orientation is an immutable characteristic.

Exodus International, the world’s largest Christian referral network dealing with homosexuality, now steers people to 260 groups across the country, up from about 100 a decade ago. The organization has 35 ministries and churches scattered around California, from the Central Valley to the U.S.-Mexico border.

Conservative religious leaders say it is important for families to have access to services as teens first awaken to their sexual orientation.

“When I was struggling with those things in the early `80s, the church didn’t seem like it had a place for me,” said Alan Chambers, president of Exodus International.

I have no idea what determines anyone’s sexual orientation, nor do I care. I do think that a person who is not happy being homosexual ought to have the right to seek whatever treatment he chooses. This law is another example of government growth and interference.  Imagine the cost of enforcing it. Will we have black-market therapy groups? This is a bad bill that needs to be voted down–not passed.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Putting The Iowa Straw Poll In Perspective

The Washington Examiner reported the results of the Iowa Straw Poll late yesterday afternoon.  Michele Bachmann won by 152 votes, with Ron Paul coming in second.  What is the world does this mean?  Well, frankly, not a whole lot.

The article at the Washington Examiner reported that 16,892 Iowans voted in the straw poll.  The straw poll is something that generally only the truly motivated voter takes part in.  In 2008, Mitt Romney won and Mike Huckabee came in second.

In writing about the Iowa Straw Poll, Wikipedia (not my favorite source, but ok on this sort of thing) reports:

Non-Republicans are allowed to vote in the Ames Straw Poll. However, all voters must be at least 16 1/2 years of age, be legal residents of the state of Iowa or a student attending an Iowa university/college, and purchase a ticket priced at $30, however some campaigns pay the fee for their supporters.[3] Voters have their hands stamped or their thumbs dipped in ink when entering the voting area so that they cannot vote twice. Ballots are put into electronic voting machines.

The message I hear in this vote is that Iowa (which supported President Obama 53.93 percent to John McCain 44.39 percent in 2008) is not happy with the status quo.  The top three votegetters all campaigned on smaller government and cutting spending. None of the top three winners are what I would call establishment Republicans.  The message I hear in this vote is that the mainstream Republican Party had better get back to its conservative roots.  The voters want more Ronald Reagan and less John McCain.

Any poll or primary election that allows members of the opposing party to vote in the primary or poll should not be taken as a valid picture of that party’s voters.  I firmly believe that the mainstream media believes that the only way President Obama can win a second term is for the media to choose the Republican candidate.  I believe that they did that in 2008 with John McCain.  I suspect they will try to do it again.

If Republicans truly want to win in 2012, they need to start paying close attention to what is going on now–not wait until October of next year.  Americans need to learn to do their own research and to understand that there will be people attempting to throw roadblocks in the way of any candidate capable of beating President Obama. The attacks on Rick Perry, Michele Bachmann, and Mitt Romney have already begun.  One thing I learned when I volunteered for a political campaign in 2010 was that campaign workers routinely check blogs and online news sources to leave comments that favor their candidate or criticize the opposing candidate.  I do not filter comments on this website according to content–only for language and relevance.  You may read a comment on this site put here by a campaign worker of a candidate I am not supporting.  Be aware of what you are reading and its source–but read everything about all the candidates you can find.  We elect the leaders we deserve.