My Objection to the underlying agenda of the ONE Campaign should be well known. ONE is part and parcel with the UN Millennium Goals (MDG) which use poverty (in the case of ONE Campaign) to milk western democracies in support of global governance and the entire UN MDG agenda. (Ugly details here, and here)
Why bring it up? Recent remarks were posted on the ONE Campaign New Hampshire Facebook page asking if their group was the same one that promoted global redistribution of wealth. A follow-up comment indicated that this was correct. Both were promptly "vanished." Deleted from the page. Kind of the way political opponents are ‘vanished’ in many of the countries struck by the kind of poverty ONE campaign claims to be fighting against.
No arguments to the contrary? No debate. No challenge to the assumption that ONE is party to global redistribution of wealth or is connected to the UN and its Millennium Development Goals agenda? An agenda that would deny the right to self defense, implement anti-American treaties and awful UN education policies (to name but a few)? Just delete the comments and hope it goes away?
Oops. That’s not going to happen.
What we should take away from this censorship is proof that something is still rotten at ONE campaign, and they do not want to discuss it. As pointed out here in December of 2009 when questioning Rich Ashooh’s affiliation with ONE Vote in back in 2007/2008…
But then there’s the One Campaign and its dedication to ending poverty by getting democrats and their fellow travelers to pilfer America with carbon taxes or to budget our wealth away with as little knowledge or consent as can be managed. So while ending poverty also looks good on paper, further investigation reveals priorities that are often confused, un-American and un-conservative.
ONE seeks to assist the UN, who seek to divert wealth (Social Justice), institute global environmental regulations through the control of CO2 emissions, collect fines for offsetting so-called environmental destruction caused by rich countries (environmental justice), as well implementing every UN world treaty including the rights of the child, rights to development, UN education mandates, international Human rights laws, and even a global ban on hand guns.
Is it any wonder they are unwilling to openly debate these claims and others?
If the UN MDG (and ONE Campaign) were really interested in making "poverty history" they would need to first accept that it cannot be done without supporting property rights, a stable government, and rule of law. But instead the UN props up dictators and despots, the very leaders who in denying their people these fundamental rights create the conditions the UN claims it wants to end (with billions and billions of US dollars.) And this is no accident. The UN is only interested in money and power. Actually ending poverty would shut off the gravy train and guilt complex agenda used to milk Western Democracies which keep them and their global socialist agenda relevant. It is world wide class warfare and the International NGO’s (like ONE) are simply socialist side-cars taking a piece of the pie.
So all the ONE campaign does (intentionally or not) is promote the global redistribution of wealth in support of the Marxist idea of Social Justice, a goal it shares with Obama and the Democrats; to use the tax code to mandate redistribution of wealth around the globe.
Of course the Democrat’s and Obama have already proceeded with that plan, without bothering to wait for congress to pass Obama’s redistributive tax. He has been engaged in foreign bank bail outs and pumping US money into the IMF to bail out foreign countries anyway.
Can’t get the tax, just spend now and tax later. (Just like the New Hampshire budget under Democrat control.) Spend now and spend more, and eventually you will have to tax to pay for the spending. It is standard left wing tactics, be it in the Granite State or on the world stage.
The money has to come from someplace. That someplace is our pockets.
So what about ONE Campaign? Everything is wrong and I think they know it. Why else censor debate on their Facebook page?