Repealing the XVI Amendment has been the most important issue facing freedom-loving Americans since 1913. In more than a century, repealing the tax on income was never mentioned in Congress, or by presidents, let alone debated.
Text: H.R.204 — 116th Congress (2019-2020)
To end membership of the United States in the United Nations.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
January 3, 2019
Mr. Rogers of Alabama introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs
A BILL
To end membership of the United States in the United Nations.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/204/text
Withdrawing from the United Nations does not require a constitutional amendment.
Withdrawing from the United Nations has been the second most important issue facing freedom-loving Americans since 1945. Throughout most of those years withdrawal was never mentioned by Television Mouths let alone debated by the public. Renouncing U.S. membership in the U.N. is finally creeping its way into public discourse.
A groundswell movement on Social Media to send the United Nations packing is picking up speed. A withdrawal movement beyond Democrat control sent elected Democrats into a panic a thousand worse than the first panic that crippled Democrats emotionally. The demise of the Soviet Union was the first and the worst bad thing that ever happened to American Communists.
After American Communists brought defeat to their own country in the Vietnam War they were certain Soviet Communists would be in power forever. Their victory in the Vietnam War convinced Democrats that toppling Communists from power anywhere in the world would never happen. That it could happen once told Democrats it could happen again. Hence, the panic among top Democrats.
The second Democrat panic is a defeat of their own making with a lot of help from the World Health Organization’s record of corruption.
As fate would have it, Democrats conspiring with their television mouthpieces set out to tighten the U.N.’s grip on American foreign policy with coronavirus scare tactics, but the opposite is taking place.
NOTE: So long as Democrats hold onto number of seats in one, or both, Houses of Congress, withdrawal is not going to be easy. Not only can a powerful minority prevent withdrawal, they can pay for a return to power in spending bills.
In any event first things first. Withdraw from the U.N. before the election in November, then defeat so many Democrats on election day the few Democrats that hold on will be completely powerless. Put in perspective by imaging Pelosi and Schumer so powerless they can no longer buy voters with tax dollars.
This is what I have been praying for for so long I will be eternally thankful my prayer was answered before I check out.
It is magnificent to see President Trump call for a complete and total shutdown of U.S. funding of the World Health Organization until we can figure out what the hell is going on. Now he must do the same for the whole United Nations behemoth.
The "Chinese Health Organization," as Japanese Deputy Prime Minister Taro Aso calls WHO, has a long track record of being political and corruptible.
In 2017, WHO's director general, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, made murderous Zimbabwean dictator Robert Mugabe a goodwill ambassador before rescinding the appointment under backlash.
It's no surprise, then, that Tedros reacted with fearmongering to Trump's Tuesday announcement that he would halt funding of the United Nations agency.
"If you don't want many more body bags, then you refrain from politicizing it," Tedros said.
The arrogance is almost too much to stomach.
The American taxpayer is responsible for 22% of the WHO 2020-21 fiscal year budget, an astounding $236.9 million. For comparison, China volunteered about half of that, just $129 million. According to Forbes, $3.5 billion in U.S. taxes have gone to the WHO in the last decade alone. The U.S. also funds about 22% of the U.N.'s budget.
Before Trump's defunding decision, the whole world witnessed undeniable evidence of the politicization of the World Health Organization. The shocking moment took place when WHO's COVID-19 response leader, Canadian epidemiologist Bruce Aylward, appeared to disconnect his Skype connection with Hong Kong reporter Yvonne Tong.
In the viral news clip, Tong persists in asking whether WHO might consider granting Taiwan membership status. It doesn't take a body-language expert to notice Aylward's discomfort at the question, one the Chinese prefer to go unaddressed.
Aylward goes silent for nearly 10 seconds before Tong asks, "Hello?"
"I'm sorry, I can't hear you. I couldn't hear your question, Yvonne," Aylward stutters before interrupting Tong to say, "No, that's OK, let's move to another one then."
Trump is not alone in his criticism of the WHO; he's just the only one willing to actually do something about it. In 2017, the London School of Economics and Political Science noted many "structural concerns that need to be addressed if the WHO is to continue in the role the global health community expects it to play."
Now, all patriots should ask Trump not to treat the U.N. with kid gloves any longer. It is, after all, the creator of the WHO and is abdicating its authority in properly regulating it.
Some Trump supporters may not want too much more to be asked of the president at this time of economic calamity and, oh yeah, a presidential election.
However, Trump only needs to finish what his administration started its first week in power. In January 2017, two executive orders were drafted for "at least a 40 percent overall" cut in U.N. funding, the New York Times reported. They were never finalized or signed.
In April 2017, Trump spoke at a luncheon of the U.N. Security Council ambassadors.
"I have long felt the United Nations is an underperformer but has tremendous potential. There are those people that think it's an underperformer and will never perform," he said.
If any potential remains, it is declining as long as the status quo is secured. The anxiety surrounding the U.N. and other international bodies prior to Trump's election and inauguration has subsided.
Remember that the U.S. pays 22% of the U.N.'s budget. But that's just its regular budget, not including other agencies the US supports, including the International Atomic Energy Agency and the Food and Agriculture Organization.
The IAEA receives $200 million annually from the U.S., about 25 percent of its budget. China, the next largest provider, gives less than half that.
The FAO takes in some $290 million yearly from the United States, over 29% of its annual budget. It produces silly hashtag activism articles like this: "6 ways indigenous peoples are helping the world achieve #Zero Hunger."
Additionally, the U.S. covers some 30% of the U.N.'s "peacekeeping" missions. How'd that work out in Rwanda, Sri Lanka and Sudan?
In his unprecedented 2016 campaign, Trump keenly observed exactly what Americans have long known, that the United Nations is a boondoggle. It forces this country into a position diametrically opposed to putting America first.
Necessary action has yet to be taken to secure America's independence from these globalist bureaucracies. What better time than now, amid a crisis of foreign origin, for Trump to knock his naysayers back on their heels?
To truly push back against China and the World Health Organization, Trump should aim at the U.N. If he lets this moment pass by, another one may never come again.
Trump defunded WHO – next up should be the U.N.
Exclusive: Gavin Wax hopes globalist body that puts 'America last' also gets the ax
By WND Guest Columnist Gavin Wax
Published April 17, 2020 at 7:10pm
https://www.wnd.com/2020/04/trump-defunded-next-u-n/
Gavin Wax is president of the New York Young Republican Club, chair of the Association of Young Republican Clubs, an associate fellow at the London Center for Policy Research, a frequent guest on Fox News and publisher of The Schpiel. You can follow him on Twitter at @GavinWax.
Text: H.R.204 — 116th Congress (2019-2020)
116th Congress H. R. 204
1st Session
To end membership of the United States in the United Nations.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
January 3, 2019
Mr. Rogers of Alabama introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs
A BILL
To end membership of the United States in the United Nations.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/204/text
Withdrawing from the United Nations does not require a constitutional amendment.
Withdrawing from the United Nations has been the second most important issue facing freedom-loving Americans since 1945. Throughout most of those years withdrawal was never mentioned by Television Mouths let alone debated by the public. Renouncing U.S. membership in the U.N. is finally creeping its way into public discourse.
A groundswell movement on Social Media to send the United Nations packing is picking up speed. A withdrawal movement beyond Democrat control sent elected Democrats into a panic a thousand worse than the first panic that crippled Democrats emotionally. The demise of the Soviet Union was the first and the worst bad thing that ever happened to American Communists.
After American Communists brought defeat to their own country in the Vietnam War they were certain Soviet Communists would be in power forever. Their victory in the Vietnam War convinced Democrats that toppling Communists from power anywhere in the world would never happen. That it could happen once told Democrats it could happen again. Hence, the panic among top Democrats.
The second Democrat panic is a defeat of their own making with a lot of help from the World Health Organization’s record of corruption.
As fate would have it, Democrats conspiring with their television mouthpieces set out to tighten the U.N.’s grip on American foreign policy with coronavirus scare tactics, but the opposite is taking place.
NOTE: So long as Democrats hold onto number of seats in one, or both, Houses of Congress, withdrawal is not going to be easy. Not only can a powerful minority prevent withdrawal, they can pay for a return to power in spending bills.
In any event first things first. Withdraw from the U.N. before the election in November, then defeat so many Democrats on election day the few Democrats that hold on will be completely powerless. Put in perspective by imaging Pelosi and Schumer so powerless they can no longer buy voters with tax dollars.
This is what I have been praying for for so long I will be eternally thankful my prayer was answered before I check out.
It is magnificent to see President Trump call for a complete and total shutdown of U.S. funding of the World Health Organization until we can figure out what the hell is going on. Now he must do the same for the whole United Nations behemoth.
The "Chinese Health Organization," as Japanese Deputy Prime Minister Taro Aso calls WHO, has a long track record of being political and corruptible.
In 2017, WHO's director general, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, made murderous Zimbabwean dictator Robert Mugabe a goodwill ambassador before rescinding the appointment under backlash.
It's no surprise, then, that Tedros reacted with fearmongering to Trump's Tuesday announcement that he would halt funding of the United Nations agency.
"If you don't want many more body bags, then you refrain from politicizing it," Tedros said.
The arrogance is almost too much to stomach.
The American taxpayer is responsible for 22% of the WHO 2020-21 fiscal year budget, an astounding $236.9 million. For comparison, China volunteered about half of that, just $129 million. According to Forbes, $3.5 billion in U.S. taxes have gone to the WHO in the last decade alone. The U.S. also funds about 22% of the U.N.'s budget.
Before Trump's defunding decision, the whole world witnessed undeniable evidence of the politicization of the World Health Organization. The shocking moment took place when WHO's COVID-19 response leader, Canadian epidemiologist Bruce Aylward, appeared to disconnect his Skype connection with Hong Kong reporter Yvonne Tong.
In the viral news clip, Tong persists in asking whether WHO might consider granting Taiwan membership status. It doesn't take a body-language expert to notice Aylward's discomfort at the question, one the Chinese prefer to go unaddressed.
Aylward goes silent for nearly 10 seconds before Tong asks, "Hello?"
"I'm sorry, I can't hear you. I couldn't hear your question, Yvonne," Aylward stutters before interrupting Tong to say, "No, that's OK, let's move to another one then."
Trump is not alone in his criticism of the WHO; he's just the only one willing to actually do something about it. In 2017, the London School of Economics and Political Science noted many "structural concerns that need to be addressed if the WHO is to continue in the role the global health community expects it to play."
Now, all patriots should ask Trump not to treat the U.N. with kid gloves any longer. It is, after all, the creator of the WHO and is abdicating its authority in properly regulating it.
Some Trump supporters may not want too much more to be asked of the president at this time of economic calamity and, oh yeah, a presidential election.
However, Trump only needs to finish what his administration started its first week in power. In January 2017, two executive orders were drafted for "at least a 40 percent overall" cut in U.N. funding, the New York Times reported. They were never finalized or signed.
In April 2017, Trump spoke at a luncheon of the U.N. Security Council ambassadors.
"I have long felt the United Nations is an underperformer but has tremendous potential. There are those people that think it's an underperformer and will never perform," he said.
If any potential remains, it is declining as long as the status quo is secured. The anxiety surrounding the U.N. and other international bodies prior to Trump's election and inauguration has subsided.
Remember that the U.S. pays 22% of the U.N.'s budget. But that's just its regular budget, not including other agencies the US supports, including the International Atomic Energy Agency and the Food and Agriculture Organization.
The IAEA receives $200 million annually from the U.S., about 25 percent of its budget. China, the next largest provider, gives less than half that.
The FAO takes in some $290 million yearly from the United States, over 29% of its annual budget. It produces silly hashtag activism articles like this: "6 ways indigenous peoples are helping the world achieve #Zero Hunger."
Additionally, the U.S. covers some 30% of the U.N.'s "peacekeeping" missions. How'd that work out in Rwanda, Sri Lanka and Sudan?
In his unprecedented 2016 campaign, Trump keenly observed exactly what Americans have long known, that the United Nations is a boondoggle. It forces this country into a position diametrically opposed to putting America first.
Necessary action has yet to be taken to secure America's independence from these globalist bureaucracies. What better time than now, amid a crisis of foreign origin, for Trump to knock his naysayers back on their heels?
To truly push back against China and the World Health Organization, Trump should aim at the U.N. If he lets this moment pass by, another one may never come again.
Trump defunded WHO – next up should be the U.N.
Exclusive: Gavin Wax hopes globalist body that puts 'America last' also gets the ax
By WND Guest Columnist Gavin Wax
Published April 17, 2020 at 7:10pm
https://www.wnd.com/2020/04/trump-defunded-next-u-n/
Gavin Wax is president of the New York Young Republican Club, chair of the Association of Young Republican Clubs, an associate fellow at the London Center for Policy Research, a frequent guest on Fox News and publisher of The Schpiel. You can follow him on Twitter at @GavinWax.