Dachsie
10th June 2020, 01:57 AM
https://headlineswithavoice.com/2020/06/09/the-blue-helmets-are-coming/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=157&v=y4DEj6qDm9U&feature=emb_logo
2:37 video runtime
Blue-Helmets are Coming
On May 28, 2020, three days after George Floyd’s death, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, Michelle Bachelet, issued a public demand: “US authorities must take serious action. Procedures must change, prevention systems must be put in place and above all police officers who resort to excessive use of force should be charged and convicted for the crimes committed.”
https://www.scribd.com/document/464901402/Urgent-Appeal-to-UN-Final#download&from_embed
Urgent Appeal to UN Final
Uploaded byLaw&Crime
Description:George Floyd's family appealed to the United Nations to take an interest in his case and promote the restructure of American policing.
Full description
from Dachsie's very old files... I have been posting this for over twenty years at various sites. This is what USA citizens should be protesting in the streets about. GET US OUT OF THE UN !
Universal Declaration of Human Rights...” That, of course, is the United Nation's Declaration of Human Rights that the IDU document is promoting as its guiding principle.
two conflicting philosophies of governance in the world.
1 American view, outlined in the Declaration of Independence, states that all people have rights they are born with and that government's only job is to protect those rights at all costs.
these rights are forever and unquestioned.
It is the foundation of human freedom.
It is what makes the United States a Republic, where the rights of minorities (even of one) are firmly defined and protected.
2.
other philosophy says that government grants our rights, professing that all such rights give way to an undefined common good whenever it's warranted - which is often. That means that all so called rights are subject to the whim of whatever gang is currently in power at the time, dictating the definitions of what constitutes the "common good." Today that is commonly called a democracy, where the power of majority rule can and does obliterate the rights of minorities.
As an example of how this second system works in practice, The Constitution of the old Soviet Union said that Soviet citizens had most of the same rights as Americans. Except that it also said individual rights were secondary to the common good. In the case of the Soviet Union, the common good was defined as creating a worldwide communist utopia where individual wants and needs simply didn't count. We all know how that worked out for the Soviet citizens.
While veiled in language designed to sound much like the Declaration of Independence, the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights actually takes this second approach, outlining specific rights it says we should all have. It says nothing of "unalienable" rights, instead referring to "rights under the law." Who or what is the law, according to the Human Rights Declaration? It says, "the will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government." Now, at first look, that sounds like America. Democracy. People voting - the opposite of dictatorship. But such a concept ignores the very root of American freedom - that our rights are guaranteed, no matter what the majority thinks or wants. Moreover,
Article 29, Section 3 of the Declaration says "These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations." So much for "unalienable" rights.
Suppose the majority of people vote to abolish your business (Wal-Mart?) or take your home (to protect bird habitat?)? The reason is always to protect the common good, or the children, or the environment, or whatever is the fad of the day. This is called majority rule, but it is still just another form of dictatorship. It's what led to the ravages of the guillotine in revolutionary France. It's rule by fear; fear of the wrong gang changing the rules; fear of standing against the crowd. Majority rule is simply a lynch mob - or more graphically, three wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for lunch.
This is the root of the philosophy entrenched in the UN's Declaration of Human Rights. It is the basis for the political policy behind Sustainable Development and the Supreme Court's Kelo decision on eminent domain. It's the philosophy that dictates a common good must be served, no matter the consequences. Personal liberty must give way to the whims of the crowd.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=157&v=y4DEj6qDm9U&feature=emb_logo
2:37 video runtime
Blue-Helmets are Coming
On May 28, 2020, three days after George Floyd’s death, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, Michelle Bachelet, issued a public demand: “US authorities must take serious action. Procedures must change, prevention systems must be put in place and above all police officers who resort to excessive use of force should be charged and convicted for the crimes committed.”
https://www.scribd.com/document/464901402/Urgent-Appeal-to-UN-Final#download&from_embed
Urgent Appeal to UN Final
Uploaded byLaw&Crime
Description:George Floyd's family appealed to the United Nations to take an interest in his case and promote the restructure of American policing.
Full description
from Dachsie's very old files... I have been posting this for over twenty years at various sites. This is what USA citizens should be protesting in the streets about. GET US OUT OF THE UN !
Universal Declaration of Human Rights...” That, of course, is the United Nation's Declaration of Human Rights that the IDU document is promoting as its guiding principle.
two conflicting philosophies of governance in the world.
1 American view, outlined in the Declaration of Independence, states that all people have rights they are born with and that government's only job is to protect those rights at all costs.
these rights are forever and unquestioned.
It is the foundation of human freedom.
It is what makes the United States a Republic, where the rights of minorities (even of one) are firmly defined and protected.
2.
other philosophy says that government grants our rights, professing that all such rights give way to an undefined common good whenever it's warranted - which is often. That means that all so called rights are subject to the whim of whatever gang is currently in power at the time, dictating the definitions of what constitutes the "common good." Today that is commonly called a democracy, where the power of majority rule can and does obliterate the rights of minorities.
As an example of how this second system works in practice, The Constitution of the old Soviet Union said that Soviet citizens had most of the same rights as Americans. Except that it also said individual rights were secondary to the common good. In the case of the Soviet Union, the common good was defined as creating a worldwide communist utopia where individual wants and needs simply didn't count. We all know how that worked out for the Soviet citizens.
While veiled in language designed to sound much like the Declaration of Independence, the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights actually takes this second approach, outlining specific rights it says we should all have. It says nothing of "unalienable" rights, instead referring to "rights under the law." Who or what is the law, according to the Human Rights Declaration? It says, "the will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government." Now, at first look, that sounds like America. Democracy. People voting - the opposite of dictatorship. But such a concept ignores the very root of American freedom - that our rights are guaranteed, no matter what the majority thinks or wants. Moreover,
Article 29, Section 3 of the Declaration says "These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations." So much for "unalienable" rights.
Suppose the majority of people vote to abolish your business (Wal-Mart?) or take your home (to protect bird habitat?)? The reason is always to protect the common good, or the children, or the environment, or whatever is the fad of the day. This is called majority rule, but it is still just another form of dictatorship. It's what led to the ravages of the guillotine in revolutionary France. It's rule by fear; fear of the wrong gang changing the rules; fear of standing against the crowd. Majority rule is simply a lynch mob - or more graphically, three wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for lunch.
This is the root of the philosophy entrenched in the UN's Declaration of Human Rights. It is the basis for the political policy behind Sustainable Development and the Supreme Court's Kelo decision on eminent domain. It's the philosophy that dictates a common good must be served, no matter the consequences. Personal liberty must give way to the whims of the crowd.