Putin More Christian Than the Pope

In President Putin’s well-considered and judicious remarks to the UN Secretary-General, Antonio Guterres on April 26, I note two statements that shed an interesting light on his larger goals in pursuing the war in Ukraine and more generally on the position Russia has taken up as the head of the resistance to the universal hegemony of the West:

We are also surprised to hear statements by our colleagues that imply that some in the world have exceptional status or can claim exclusive rights because the Charter of the United Nations reads that all participants in international communication are equal regardless of their strength, size or geographical location. I think this is similar to what the Bible reads about all people being equal. I am sure we will find the same idea in both the Quran and the Torah. All people are equal before God. So, the idea that someone can claim a kind of exceptional status is very strange to us.

Since every word from Putin’s mouth is considered, I take the manner in which he has articulated his concerns about certain UN members to be highly significant.

First, it should be noted that he is attacking exceptionalism of any kind, which would imply both American exceptionalism and any other exceptionalism.

Now, exceptionalism is much the same thing as supremacism.

President Putin of course has positioned himself  very publicly  against Nazism, specifically the Nazism exhibited by some parts of the Ukrainian government. That is well known. However, he has for some time been hinting at something more.

And here he is clarifying what that is. It is the more general category to which Nazism belongs, supremacism.

The political point Putin is making to the Secretary-General is that actions of member-states that are similar should be treated similarly by the UN. If Kosovo could declare itself independent and this was recognized by the International Court, then the independence of the Donbass should be treated equally. Equality before the law cannot co-exist with an exceptionalist treatment of one country, permitting it a leeway  in action none other has. American exceptionalism is clearly the target here.

Then, significantly, President Putin, derives the equality of member- states in the UN from  the notion of equality among human beings given to us in religious scripture. And here he does something very illuminating.  He lists the religious texts that support the notion of equality: the Bible, the Koran, and the Torah.

Notice that he omits the Talmud and he omits any Hindu scripture, such as the Vedas or Upanishads, but since Hinduism is not represented in Russia in any substantial way, so that is not a surprise. What is a surprise is his omission of the Talmud, which is the scripture that most regulates Jewish practice, since Judaism, especially Chabad, is well-represented in Russia.  In fact, Chabad is the most powerful Jewish community in the country. Now, there is no question that there is in Chabad a supremacist vein, found in such texts as Ha Tanya, as well as, more generally, in the Talmud. Thus, when President Putin omits any reference to the Talmud and instead directly mentions the Torah, it is significant, since the Torah is most important among true Torah following Jews, who are anti-Zionist and constitute a very small group, and among the equally small group of Karaite Jews.

Besides that omission, the order of the list is also significant. President Putin mentions the Bible first, giving pride of place to Christianity among the traditional Russian faiths. He then mentions the Koran, giving Islam the second place, and with the Torah, gives Judaism its due. This particular ordering might be linked to the size of the demographic each religion represents in the Russian federation, with the state aligning itself first with the Orthodox faith and presenting itself as the defender of that faith.

From the political context, it is clear that President Putin is opposing his defense of equality to the supremacism practiced by two exceptionalist groups, the one in Ukraine which has a pagan and occult basis, and the one embodied in NATO and the West, that also draws on the pagan and the occult. I will leave it open whether one should extrapolate from Mr. Putin’s words an implicit indictment of Talmudic supremacism or not.

Now, contrast this with the words of the head of the Catholic church, Pope Francis, in a speech to Congress on September 24, 2015, in which he called for inclusion and fraternity. The Pope managed to mention both Moses and Mohammed but omitted the name of Jesus Christ. Clearly, in that at least President Putin is a more forthright defender of the Christian faith in the public sphere.

Feds gun-grabbing across America

International gun-grabbing signed into place:

Secretary of State John F. Kerry said Monday the United States will sign on to a U.N. treaty on arms control, over the objections of many in Congress who say the global document would clamp down on America’s Second Amendment.

The U.S. “welcomes” the next step in treaty ratification, Mr. Kerry said in a statement reported by Fox News and issued the same day the United Nations held a formal signing ceremony on New York.

 

Meanwhile, on the domestic gun-grabbing front:

* Obama’s new Surgeon-General, Vivek Murthy, is a relatively young, British-born gun-control enthusiast,  rather than the established and distinguished senior professional usually chosen.

*A senior staff officer (Lt. Colonel Robert Bates) took to the pages of Esquire magazine to announce his six-point program to confiscate guns from gun-owners, including in his provisions a 400% tax on ammunition and confiscation at death (except for 3 specified types).

*New legal precedents are being set across the nation that enable the police to label people as “suspicious” or even a “domestic terrorist,”  and use that to unilaterally invade their homes, without warrant, and confiscate fire-arms and property.

From Freedom Outpost:

Last month, when a group of concerned citizens assembled at Bundy Ranch in Nevada to protest government overreach, Senator Harry Reid dubbed them “domestic terrorists.” Even paying with cash or complaining about chemicals in water can land an American on the terror watch list. Non-conformists who do not subscribe to the status quo can now be considered mentally insane according to psychiatrists’ Diagnostic and Statistics Manual of Mental Disorders.

Law enforcement has an almost unlimited amount of circumstances they can cite to justify threats to one’s self or others, and thus, to ignore Constitutional requirements when serving at the behest of the local, state or federal government.

Has the Federal Court’s latest decision made it possible for these vaguely defined suspicious activities to be molded into exigent circumstances that give police the right to enter homes without due process, confiscate legally owned personal belongings, and detain residents without charge?”

http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/05/fed-court-ruling-cops-can-kick-in-your-door-confiscate-guns-without-warrant-or-charges/#j3xdWL1V19k8Z6Xu.99

Pro-life advocacy is “torture,” claims feminist NGO

The American Center for Law and Justice reports that women’s rights NGO’s are trying to claim that the pro-life position falls under the rubric of torture:

To be clear, the effort by the Center for Reproductive Rights clearly and explicitly targets the church’s rights to free speech and religious liberty. Here’s an excerpt from its recommendations to the Committee:

QUOTE

Note that the Holy See has negatively interfered with states’ attempts to develop legislation on abortion that would have served to better protect women from torture or ill-treatment. Note that the Holy See’s actions are a violation of Articles 1, 2, and 16 of the Convention against Torture and that the rights of freedom of speech and of religion extend only so far as they do not undermine women’s reproductive rights, including the right to be free from torture or ill-treatment. “(Emphasis added.)

END QUOTE

This is an astonishing statement, one that clearly targets the Catholic Church’s pro-life advocacy, equating it with state-sanctioned “torture or ill-treatment” of women and girls. By equating advocacy with torture, the Committee could begin an international legal process that would cause the U.N. to review statements or actions by pro-life public officials as “torture” within the meaning of the Convention. Radical pro-abortion groups would file amicus briefs citing new international legal standards equating pro-life advocacy with torture, thus claiming such advocacy is beyond the protection of the First Amendment.”

 

Women’s rights begin in the womb

http://www.priestsforlife.org/africanamerican/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/s-Righs-Begin-in-the-Womb.jpg

PriestsforLife points out how abortion providers target poor people and racial minorities, so that over 60 percent of the victims of abortion in the US are non-whites. This is the fulfillment of the eugenicist dreams of Planned Parenthood’s founder, Margaret Sanger. Combine this with the race-replacement goals of unrestricted subsidized immigration and you get a different picture of the leftist agenda.

It is telling that left-liberals cover up this real murderous racism, while nattering on about people’s unpleasant or offensive words:

“As an African American woman, the threat to my freedom is under siege with the threat of the HHS mandate looming over my vocation at PFL, and over the plight of my people whom abortion threatens to depopulate because of our skin color.

The CDC’s latest Abortion Surveillance report (Nov. 29, 2013) found that between 2007 and 2010, nearly 36 percent of all abortions in the U.S. were performed on black children, even though blacks make up only 12.8 percent of the population. Another 21 percent of abortions were performed on Hispanics, and an additional seven percent on other minority races. A total of 64 percent of all abortions were on minority groups.

A disproportionate number of Planned Parenthood abortion mills, 79 percent, are in black and other minority neighborhoods; further evidence of the targeting of minorities by the abortion industry.

Women like Tonya Reeves and Lakisha Wilson are dying in these abortion mills. Abortion has also robbed men like boxer Floyd Mayweather of fatherhood.

Dangerous carcinogens contraceptives are harmful to women and are negatively impacting our society. The effects of these contraceptives lead to increased risk of various cancers, infertility, depression, suicidal ideation and suicide attempts, psychological problems, relational problems, and a host of other issues including death.

Abortion has also been linked to cancer and other female disorders.

Please connect the dots. Abortion and applied use of carcinogenic fertility blockers masquerading as “birth control” are acts that repeatedly result in the often painful deaths of a children in the womb and which can inflict lasting negative emotional, physical and psychological consequences on women is real torture. Yet some officials and experts – at home and abroad – continue to chose to ignore these facts, focusing instead to challenge the Prolife Community’s respect for the right to life and opposition to abortion.

The fight for religious freedom, the battle against the unjust HHS Mandate, the UN crusade against fertility, the decimating impact of abortion on the Black community; these are not isolated incidents. They are all part of a war on the rights of children, women, families and the global communities. God help us! This is war! Please pray with us and join us in the march towards victory.”

UN legal body endorses Khobragade’s immunity

Anil Nauriya, who advocates before the Supreme Court of India, has added an important point (in the Comment section):

Regarding the arrest of a Consular official, the Vienna Convention requires that this may be done [in the case of a grave offence] “pursuant to a decision by the competent judicial authority”?

The question is whether even a PRE-TRIAL judicial warrant of arrest would be such a “decision”.
The focus in much of the discussion has been on the meaning of “grave offence”.


I would argue yet another aspect of the question : that the pre-trial arrest even of a Consular Official [without full diplomatic Immunity] is of doubtful legality and, in any event,  had to be the subject of a pre-arrest hearing leading to a pre-arrest judicial decision on such liability for pre-trial and pre-indictment arrest.

Before such a pre-arrest hearing, all that the “competent judicial authority” could have done is to issue a summons and pass an order preventing the Consular official from leaving the US pending such a pre-arrest hearing.

The Deccan Herald reports that the UN legal office supports Khobragade’s claim:

” A United Nations agency has endorsed New Delhi’s claim that Indian Foreign Service officer Devyani Khobragade enjoyed full diplomatic immunity when she was arrested by the United States law-enforcement officials in New York on December 12 last.

The opinion of the UN Office of Legal Affairs (OLA) supports New Delhi’s argument that Khobragade enjoyed full immunity at the time of her arrest as she had already been accredited to the international organisation as a representative of India since August last year.

Khobragade’s lawyers have cited the UN OLA’s view in a court in Manhattan to counter the recent move by Preet Bharara, the US district attorney for southern district of New York, to dismiss New Delhi’s claim.

Stephen Mathias, UN Assistant Secretary General for Legal Affairs, on January 27 last wrote to India’s Deputy Permanent Representative to the international organisation conveying the UN OLA’s views on the issue. ”

He wrote that representatives of all members of the United Nations “to the principal and subsidiary organs of the United Nations and to conferences convened by the United Nations, while exercising their functions and during their journey to and from the place of meeting, enjoy the privileges and immunities set forth in Section 11 of the General Convention”.

UN: Abandon Dollars, All Ye Who Enter NWO (Updated)

Update: (July 1): The alternative sites have just picked this up today July 1. See 321gold (via Press TV, Daily Reckoning)… Chuckle.  You get the scoop here…

One more call for replacement of the dollar with SDRs, which will be under central management at the BIS (Bank of International Settlements). My notes in italics.

Reuters, Tuesday, 29 Jun 2010

Word Government Alert: UN Spends Haiti Money On Expanding Its Personnel

Next time there’s a natural disaster and you think the government should “do its share,” “help out” or be compassionate, remember this:

“The United Nations has quietly upped this year’s peacekeeping budget for earthquake-shattered Haiti to $732.4 million, with two-thirds of that amount going for the salary, perks and upkeep of its own personnel, not residents of the devastated island.

The world organization plans to spend the money

on an expanded force of some 12,675 soldiers and police, plus some 479 international staffers, 669 international contract personnel, and 1,300 local workers, just for the 12 months ending June 30, 2010.

Some $495.8 million goes for salaries, benefits, hazard pay, mandatory R&R allowances and upkeep for the peacekeepers and their international staff support. Only about $33.9 million, or 4.6 percent, of that salary total is going to what the U.N. calls “national staff” attached to the peacekeeping effort.”

UN Funds Missing Billion Plus in Climate Change Donations

The Telegraph reported a few days ago that UN Funds were missing over a billion dollars contributed to tackle climate change in developing countries:

“A total of 20 nations pledged up to 410 million dollars (£247m) a year in 2001, resulting in a pot that should be worth well over 1.6 billion dollars (£963m).
But only 260m dollars (£157m) has been paid into two United Nations funds earmarked for the purpose according to the latest figures, the BBC World Service investigation said.
The EU told the broadcaster that the money was collected in ”bilateral and multilateral deals”, but was unable to provide data to back up the claim.
The sums were pledged in the 2001 Bonn Declaration, which was signed by the 15 countries that then made up the European Union, plus Canada, Iceland, New Zealand, Norway and Switzerland.

As of the end of September this year, the two UN funds – called the Least Developed Countries and Climate Change Funds – contained 155.4m dollars and 104.1m dollars respectively, the BBC said.
Boni Biagini, who runs the funds, told the broadcaster: ”These numbers don’t match the 410m per year. Otherwise, we’d be handling billions of dollars by now.”

UN Recommends New Global Currency

In the news, on September 7, Bloomberg reports that the UN wants a new global currency, ostensibly to protect emerging markets:

“UN countries should agree on the creation of a global reserve bank to issue the currency and to monitor the national exchange rates of its members, the Geneva-based UN Conference on Trade and Development said today in a report.

China, India, Brazil and Russia this year called for a replacement to the dollar as the main reserve currency after the financial crisis sparked by the collapse of the U.S. mortgage market led to the worst global recession since World War II. China, the world’s largest holder of dollar reserves, said a supranational currency such as the International Monetary Fund’s special drawing rights, or SDRs, may add stability.

My Comment
(coming up)

UN Human Development Index for 2008 – Country Rankings

The top 10 countries by “human development” according to the UN

1. Iceland
2. Norway
3. Canada
4. Australia
5. Ireland
6. Netherlands
7. Sweden
8. Japan
9. Luxembourg
10. Switzerland

Among the first 50, the United States is 15. New Zealand is 20, the United Kingdom is 21 and Germany is 23.

In the next tier, Mexico is 52, Malaysia is at 63, Brazil at 70.

Considerably below them is India at 132, somewhere between Bhutan and Laos, worse off than South Africa, but better than Cambodia.

I’m not sure these rankings should be taken too seriously, but for people trying to figure out places to study, live, work, and invest, it might be a good place to start.

Personally, I fail to see why Malaysia should be behind Mexico, which is run by drug cartels right now.
As for Canada, no country with that much snow should be in the top ten….