Broon wants US to Repeal The Declaration of Independence

#1
HERE

Not content with ruining this country - Cyclops want to rule the US too!
Borderfire Report said:
England's Call to Repeal Our Declaration of Independence
Tuesday, 29 April 2008
by Phyllis Schlafly

It's a good thing that British Prime Minister Gordon Brown's U.S. visit was upstaged by the dramatic reception Americans gave Pope Benedict XVI. Brown might have been booed if he hadn't delivered what aides called his "signature" speech within the cloistered walls of Harvard's Kennedy Center.

Brown's tedious, hour-long speech impudently demanded that we issue a "Declaration of Interdependence" in order to submit to global governance. That's another way of calling on us to repeal our Declaration of Independence.

No thanks for the advice, Mr. Brown. Brave Americans rose up and rejected Britain's royalist rule in 1776, and we've gotten along mighty well without transatlantic interference in our government for more than two centuries. We certainly don't want to reinstate any foreign supervision today.

The redundancy of Brown's outrageous semantics was oppressive. His speech used the word global 69 times, globalization 7 times, and interdependence 13 times. He referred to Kennedy 19 times, lavishing fulsome praise on John F. ("his influence abides everywhere"), Robert (he sent forth "ripples of hope"), and Ted ("one of the greatest Senators in more than two centuries").

Brown rejected the traditional concept of national sovereignty, which means an independent nation not subservient to any outside control, telling us to replace it with "responsible sovereignty," which he defined as accepting what he calls our global "obligations." Hold on to your pocketbook.

Brown admitted that his "main argument" is that we must accept "new global rules," "new global institutions," and "global networks." Brown's global rules include massive U.S. cash handouts and opening U.S. borders to the world.

Brown's use of well-known American political phrases was tacky. He tried to morph FDR's New Deal into a "New Global Deal," and JFK's New Frontier into "the New Frontier is that there is no frontier."

Brown even slipped in an attempt at thought control: "Americans must learn to think inter-continentally." He declaimed, "We are all internationalists now."

Using the rhetorical device of inevitability, Brown warned us that his vision of the globalist future is "irreversible transformation." He wants to "transcend states" and "transcend borders" as he builds the "architecture of a global society."

Brown peddled the nonsense that the peoples of the world "subscribe to similar ideals." He tried to tell us that all religions (Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists) have "common values" and "similar ideals." No, they certainly do not.

Brown wants to increase the power of the United Nations to become the source of "an international stand-by capacity of trained civilian experts, ready to go anywhere at any time," and even be able to exercise "military force." Americans do not intend to cede such authority to the corrupt UN.

The silliest part of Brown's ponderous speech was his claim that "a global society" is "advancing democracy widely across the world." In fact, he doesn't even practice democracy in his own country.

Brown refused to allow the British people to vote on whether or not they want to accept the European Union (EU) constitution. He acquiesced in the plot of the constitution's author, Valery Giscard d'Estaing, to put the EU constitution into effect by calling it a treaty so it did not have to be voted on by the people.

Brown was chicken about the treaty subterfuge and did not permit a photographic record of his participation. He sent his Foreign Secretary to perform the official treaty signing in front of cameras.

The EU constitution, now called the Treaty of Lisbon, requires all signers to surrender their sovereignty and democracy to unelected bureaucrats in Brussels and judges in Strasbourg. The EU constitution takes away England's right to pass its own laws, forces England to surrender more than 60 UK vetoes of EU decisions, and gives the EU bureaucracy and tribunals total control over England's immigration policy.

Instead of a self-governing nation whose democratic system was developed over centuries, England is now ruled by what Margaret Thatcher called "the paper pushers in Brussels."

Brown made his globalism speech emphatic by repeatedly invoking the words "New World Order." The New World Order Brown tries to con the United States into accepting would mean taxing Americans for foreign handouts so immense they would make the Marshall Plan look puny, global warming rules to drastically reduce our standard of living, and putting American workers in a common labor pool with the world's billions who subsist on less than $2 a day.

Gordon Brown invited us to march forward to globalism "where there is no path." He's correct that there is no path on which we can expect globalism to lead us to a better world; in fact every path toward global government is a surrender of our liberty and our prosperity.

Gordon Brown should go back home and study up on how Americans refused to accept orders from King George III.

Mrs. Schlafly is the founder and president of Eagle Forum, a national organization of citizens who participate as volunteers in the public policymaking process. It maintains offices on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. and in Alton, Illinois. She is also the founder and president of Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund, a think-tank which has its national headquarters at the Eagle Forum Education Center in St. Louis. Mrs. Schlafly did weekly television commentaries on the CBS Morning News, 1974-1975, and on CNN, 1980-83. She has also written and produced several documentary videos on such issues as American inventors, education, and treaties. She has appeared on almost every network news and public affairs program.
 
#2
Apparently, CCN has reported severe flooding caused by millions of Americans p1ssing themselves laughing... :rofl:
 
#3
I wouldn't be surprised. Don't forget that around 2000, Tony Blair repealed the Act of Parliament which (notionally at least) abolished slavery on the grounds of obsolescence. Now Britain could reintroduce slavery, just so long as it did so using the pretext of respecting the rights of the religious to manifest their faith.... ;)
 
#5
considering how well gulf war 2 has gone :roll:
the concept of listening and realizing most of the world isn't america and may have a different point of view is valid
brown still a cnut though
 
#6
Bravo_Zulu said:
When this muppet isn't destroying the UK at home, he's embarrassing it abroad.

General Election, anyone?
I concur,it really is painful seeing this mandateless wretch out there in the international arena trying to convince the bigger boys to join his 6th form socialist club.I only hope that the legal challenge from Stuart Wheeler bears fruit so we can start putting the repugnent little commie in his place prior to an election.
 
#7
insert-coin-here said:
Bravo_Zulu said:
When this muppet isn't destroying the UK at home, he's embarrassing it abroad.

General Election, anyone?
I concur,it really is painful seeing this mandateless wretch out there in the international arena trying to convince the bigger boys to join his 6th form socialist club.I only hope that the legal challenge from Stuart Wheeler bears fruit so we can start putting the repugnent little commie in his place prior to an election.
Personnaly I fear the damage the cnut WILL do before we get the oppurtunity to get rid of him.
If he had any respect for the electorate he would go today, can it be any clearer that he is not wanted? He was not elected, he is guilty of treason with the Lisbon Treaty, he is simply not wanted.

I would like to see taxation dropped immediately so people can actually live, the majority of the bullshit laws introduced in the last 10 years repealed and the Big Brother State reversed.
 
#8
I thought this was a 'wind-up' and even momentarily imagined it might be April Fool's Day. No, this is a genuine article by a respected commentator.

I think this is absolute proof that Brown is not only 'psychologically flawed' but certifiably insane.

Luckily for Great Britain there are very few people in the the American administration who know, or care, who he is, and, amongst the great American population, he is as anonymous as me!

He must be got rid of. The current bad financial is largely of his making (see many of my previous posts) and he MUST be held to account.

Bliar was bad but this man is awful (see also many of my previous posts).
 
#9
My, but they're a touchy bunch, aren't they? If telling other countries how to organise their internal affairs and that they should be subordinate to an external power is such a bad thing, how do they account for the last 60-odd years of US history?
 
#10
smartascarrots said:
My, but they're a touchy bunch, aren't they? If telling other countries how to organise their internal affairs and that they should be subordinate to an external power is such a bad thing, how do they account for the last 60-odd years of US history?
They are the children of the globe. As has been said before, the fireplace in my pub is older than their country!

They´ll calm down soon enough, when it´s bed time. Then the grown ups can talk. :D
 
#12
The man's an embarrassment and out of his depth. Reminiscent of the Grauniad trying to tell US voters who they should vote for a while ago (and being well abused by all sides for it).
 
#13
This halfwit is supposed to represent 'us',the British People,so with that in mind - they must think we're a bunch of cnuts for electing him,oh no hang on, we didn't did we!That other cnut wrapped and clueless took over.A strange idea of democracy we have,no wonder the septics giggle when they see our 'Leader'!
 
#14
The man in a weasel a political pygmy and now an international embarrassment. He was not voted in by the British people and has done everything he can think of to avoid making decisions. BTW how did we ever loose those 13 colonies as we won almost every battle?
 
#15
Maybe his back benchers huddle round, come up with the most ridiculous idea, suggest it to Brown and wait and see if he trys to implement it!

"Gordon, we reckon when you're in the US you should try and win over their nation by suggesting this". (Gordon gleefully taking hold of ciggy packet with idea pencilled on back.... )
 
#16
lsquared said:
I thought this was a 'wind-up' and even momentarily imagined it might be April Fool's Day. No, this is a genuine article by a respected commentator.
She's no more respected a commentator than Michael Moore is on the political left. Think of her more as Ann Coulter's mother. SHe once described sex education in schools as "in-home sales parties for abortions". With regard to domestic rape, last year she said "By getting married, the woman has consented to sex, and I don't think you can call it rape."

Schafly is the worst kind of reactionary hack. She hates any kind of international organization (UN, NATO, WTO etc.) that you care to mention and while Brown is undoubtedly a cnut, I'll be willing to bet that this senile old trout has mischaracterised pretty much his entire speech in order to appeal to the knuckle-dragging, mouth-breathing classes.
 
#17
crabtastic said:
lsquared said:
I thought this was a 'wind-up' and even momentarily imagined it might be April Fool's Day. No, this is a genuine article by a respected commentator.
She's no more respected a commentator than Michael Moore is on the political left. Think of her more as Ann Coulter's mother. SHe once described sex education in schools as "in-home sales parties for abortions". With regard to domestic rape, last year she said "By getting married, the woman has consented to sex, and I don't think you can call it rape."

Schafly is the worst kind of reactionary hack. She hates any kind of international organization (UN, NATO, WTO etc.) that you care to mention and while Brown is undoubtedly a cnut, I'll be willing to bet that this senile old trout has mischaracterised pretty much his entire speech in order to appeal to the knuckle-dragging, mouth-breathing classes.

I don't think so.

She summed up that speech pretty well. "Tendentious" is a word she didn't use but should have, as is "platitude" and "impertinence". "Tedious", on the other hand, was early on and well deserved.
 
#18
Double post
 
#19
Here's the speech:

http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page15303.asp

Just to give you a few pointers about what a hatchet job Schafly did:

Schafly said:
Brown even slipped in an attempt at thought control: "Americans must learn to think inter-continentally."
Whereas Brown said:
Nothing in President Kennedy's enduring legacy has greater importance now - at the beginning of the 21st century - than his words on your Independence Day in 1962 when he proposed a new and global declaration of interdependence.

'Today Americans must learn to think inter-continentally' he said. 'Acting alone by ourselves [America] cannot establish justice throughout the world. We cannot ensure America's domestic tranquillity; provide for its common defence; or promote its general welfare; or secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity. But joined with other free nations we can do all this and more'.
So he was actually quoting Kennedy.

Schafly said:
Brown rejected the traditional concept of national sovereignty, which means an independent nation not subservient to any outside control, telling us to replace it with "responsible sovereignty," which he defined as accepting what he calls our global "obligations." Hold on to your pocketbook.
Yet no-one in 1962 could have foreseen the sheer scale of the new global challenges that our growing interdependence brings: their scale, their diversity and the speed with which they have emerged:

* the globalisation of the economy;
* the threat of climate change;
* the long struggle against international terrorism;
* the need to protect millions from violence and conflict and to face up to the international consequences of poverty and inequality.

Challenges that all point in one direction - to the urgent necessity for global cooperation. For none of them - from economy to environment - can be solved without us finding new ways of working more closely together.

To recognize this is important. But simply to acknowledge that there are no 'Britain-only' or 'Europe-only' or 'America-only' solutions to the global threats and challenges we face - or to say we are all internationalists now - will change nothing in itself.

Instead, we must go much further: acknowledging that our common self-interest as nation states can be realised only by practical cooperation; that 'responsible sovereignty' means the acceptance of clear obligations as well as the assertion of rights.
Does anone here actually believe that these problems can be solved without international cooperation? Schafly's problem is that she thinks that America's problems can be solved by pulling up the drawbridge- something that has NEVER worked throughout the whole of American history, from pirates on the Barbary Coast, through to the Smoot-Hawley Tarrif act which caused the Great Depression to spiral even further out of control, and to the threat from terrorism. She's a dinosaur who just refuses to admit that, for better or for worse, we're all in it together.
 
#20
Don't you think that the continual quoting of Kennedy (the arch-Democrat) was a bit rude while in the Presidency of an arch-Republican? I'd say he was very lucky not to have been boo'd.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top